IRLF 


SB   Sfl    MD2 


H   F 

1755 

K62 

1883 

MAIN 


THE  TARIFF: 

^PROTECTION  ^H 

TRADE 


By  ABBOT  KINNEY. 


*•'••£' -ice  35  Cents. 


LO 

KT 
OJ 
LO 


LIBRARY 

OF  THK 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

I  FT  OF 


Received 
Accession  No. 


Class  A/o, 


4  pi 


I 
THE   TARIFF. 

Protection  vs.  Free  Trade, 


JLIBIBOT 


The  details  of  the  tax  known  as  the  Protective  Tariff  have 
been  much  worked  with,  but  the  principles  of  taxation  and  of 
government  to  which  these  details  must  be  referred  to  be  un- 
derstood, receive  but  scant  attention. 

The  details  of  administration  in  all  things  must  be  in 
accord  with  the  fundamental  principles  and  general  truths 
upon  which  the  matter  rests,  otherwise  any  theory  based  upon 
such  erroneous  details  is  as  though  based  on  shifting  sands.  It 
must  fall;  the  higher  and  grander  the  structure  thus  founded, 
the  more  certain  is  its  downfall. 

There  are  now  in  this  country  two  opposing  policies  in 
regard  to  Custom  House  taxation.  One  of  these  is  the  policy 
of  a  tariff  or  tax  for  revenue  only.  The  money  thus  raised  is 
used  by  the  government  for  the  maintenance  of  order,  defend- 
ing the  commonwealth  and  the  usual  legitimate  needs  of 
administrating  the  laws.  Incidentally  this  tax  like  all  others 
works  harder  on  some  persons  than  on  others,  but  this  it  tries 
to  avoid.  It  never  intends  private  persons  to  derive  a  revenue 
from  public  taxes.  The  tariff  or  tax  for  revenue  only  is  laid 
exclusively  for  the  benefit  of  the  government  and  to  derive  the 
greatest  amount  of  return  with  the  least  burden  on  trade.  The 
other  policy  is  called  a  tariff  or  tax  for  protection.  This  is 
mainly  laid  for  the  benefit  of  private  enterprises  in  the  hands 
of  private  persons  who  operate  them  solely  for  their  own 
advantage.  Without  these  contributions  forced  from  the 
people  by  this  system  of  taxing  and  without  the  revenue  the 


The  Tariff. 


favored  ones  thus  receive,  it  is  contended  that  their  enterprises 
would  languish.  The  incidental  part  of  the  protective  tax  is 
that  the  government  receives  a  revenue.  This  revenue  going 
to  the  government,  however,  is  but  a  small  part  of  the  tax  paid 
by  the  people.  It  is  impossible  to  determine  what  this  propor- 
tion is,  but  it  is  probably  less  than  ten  per  cent  of  the  tax  paid 
and  may  not  be  one  per  cent;  that  is  90  per  cent,  or  perhaps 
99  per  cent,  of  this  public  tax  for  protection  goes  to  private 
persons,  and  from  one  to  ten  per  cent,  goes  to  public  uses. 
The  culmination  of  the  protective  tax  is  that  private  persons 
should  receive  all  and  the  government  none,  either  by  making 
the  tax  so  high  as  to  be  prohibitive  on  foreign  importations,  or 
by  actually  prohibiting  them. 

It  is  now  forbidden  to  Americans  to  purchase  ships  except 
when  made  in  American  yards.  Thus  a  few  ship  builders  are 
enabled  to  lay  a  tax  .on  shipping  satisfactory  to  themselves 
and  at  the  same  time  furnish  such  goods  as  they  like.  Ship 
building  thus  receives  the  greatest  amount  of  protection,  but  it 
languishes.  What  good  has  the  country  obtained  by  the  total 
prohibition  of  the  importation  of  ships?  This  is  the  logical 
extreme  of  protection.  We  have  the  sad  spectacle  before  us  of 
a,  once  powerful  merchant  marine  proudly  holding  its  own 
against  the  world  and  carrying  our  bright  flag  into  the  corners 
of  the  earth  ruined,  a  beggar,  whining  for  bounties  at  the  feet  of 
Congress.  The  tariff  has  placed  the  industries  it  has  been  sup- 
posed to  favor  for  thirty  years  either  in  the  position  of  trusts 
and  gigantic  monopolies  grinding  both  their  laborers  and  the 
people  at  large  as  much  as  they  can,  or  else  in  the  position  of 
beggars  seeking  for  bounties  and  charity  from  the  public  upon 
whom  they  have  so  long  preyed.  Who  pays  this  tax?  It  can 
not  be  the  producer  or  foreigner;  it  must  be  the  consumer;  the 
consumers  are  the  people  of  the  United  States  who  pay  the 
tax  in  the  price  of  nearly  everything  that  they  use.  The 
support  of  the  protected  industries  is  not  by  any  foreigners 
but  by  taxes  laid  on  the  American  people  themselves. 

By  the  protective  system,  though  the  tax  is  levied  by  the 
government,  the  collection  of  the  greater  portion  of  it  is  dele- 
gated to  the  manufacturers  or  other  individuals  interested. 
These  demand  such  proportion  as  they  like,  which  is  in  prac- 
tice all  that  the  people  will  pay. 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade 


In  considering  this  question  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that 
all  tariffs  or  taxes  collected  from  the  people  by  government 
authority  or  connivance  are  taxes  for  the  levying  and  using  of 
which  the  government  is  responsible. 

Taxes  are  unpleasant  but  they  are  necessary.  Man's 
experience  shows  that  law  and  order  can  not  be  maintained 
without  organized  government.  The  existence  of  governments 
depends  on  their  power  to  maintain  themselves.  To  maintain 
government  there  must  be  contribution.  Voluntary  contribu- 
tions would  distribute  the  burden  unequally.  Some  would 
pay  and  some  would  not.  It  has  been  found  necessary  in 
justice  to  all,  to  assess  taxes  for  maintaining  government 
equally  according  to  the  interests  at  stake  and  to  make  the 
contribution  a  forced  one,  so  that  no  one  can  throw  his  just 
share  unfairly  upon  his  neighbors. 

The  justification  of  such  forced  tax  is  that  it  is  exclusively 
for  the  public  good.  A  tax  then  should  be  always  for  the  pub- 
lic good,  plainly  and  directly  for  the  public  good  and  only  for 
the  public  good. 

"No  taxation  without  representation"  should  have  as  com- 
panion mottoes  these:  "The  public  needs  are  the  sole  excuse 
for  a  public  tax;"  "No  tax  for  a  private  use  is  just." 

The  question  at  once  arises  when  the  protective  theory  is 
looked  at  in  this  light,  does  the  taxing  of  the  whole  people  for 
less  than  ten  per  cent,  of  their  number,  harmonize  with  the 
fundamental  principles  of  taxation  in  a  free  government. 

It  is  said  that  the  distribution  of  the  protective  tax  to  the 
capitalists  thus  favored  enables  them  to  carry  on  industries 
which,  owing  to  the  high  price  of  labor  in  this  country,  they 
would  otherwise  be  unable  to  do,  and  that  though  these  capital- 
ists are  first  helped  and  benefited  by  the  tax,  the  people  in 
general  are  also  benefited  by  the  market  this  favored  class 
make  for  the  goods  of  the  common  herd.  A  plain  statement 
of  the  position  is  this.  The  whole  people  are  taxed  for  a  few. 
The  few  keep  the  tax  except  such  part  as  they  pay  at  home 
for  the  gratification  of  their  private  appetites  and  desires. 
With  their  families  often  in  Europe  and  their  own  tours  to  the 
old  world,  even  this  return  of  the  tax  is  small.  The  tax  which 
the  government  enables  these  few  to  collect  from  our  people  is 
thus  often  spent  among  what  these  schemers  are  fond  of  call- 


The   Tariff. 


ing  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe.     But  at   the    best    it    is  only 
robbing  Peter  to  pay  Paul. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has  not  passed 
on  the  legality  of  a  protective  tariff  that  I  am  aware  of,  but  it 
has  passed  on  local  laws,  measures  and  taxes  had  and  im- 
posed for  the  benefit  of  individuals  or  corporations  to  increase 
the  private  fortunes  of  these  under  color  of  advancing  the 
public  good.  The  protective  system  in  internal  taxation,  to 
favor  certain  classes  of  business  at  the  expense  of  others,  has 
received  from  this  court  its  death  blow. 

One  of  the  clear  cases  on  this  subject  is  that  of  the  Cleve- 
land Loan  Association  against  the  City  of  Topeka.  This  was 
a  case  where  the  City  of  Topeka  granted  its  bonds  to  an  iron 
bridge  building  company  on  condition  that  this  company 
would  locate  in  Topeka,  and  the  question  arose  on  the  validity 
of  the  bonds.  I  quote  some  sentences  from  the  syllabus  and 
from  Justice  Miller's  opinion. 

Loan  Association  vs.  Topeka,  20  Wallace.  "There  is  no 
such  thing  in  our  government,  State  and  National,  as  unlim- 
ited power  in  any  of  their  branches." 

"There  are  limitations  of  such  powers  which  arise  out  of 
the  essential  nature  of  all  free  governments;  implied  reserva- 
tions of  individual  rights,  without  which  the  social  compact 
could  not  exist,  and  which  are  respected  by  all  governments 
entitled  to  the  name." 

"Among  these  is  the  limitation  of  the  right  of  taxation 
that  it  can  only  be  used  in  aid  of  a  public  object." 

"It  cannot  therefore  be  exercised  in  aid  of  enterprises 
strictly  private  for  the  benefit  of  individuals,  though  in  a  re- 
mote or  collateral  way  the  local  public  may  be  benefited 
thereby." 

"A  statute  which  authorizes  a  town  to  issue  its  bonds  in 
aid  of  the  manufacturing  enterprise  of  individuals  is  void,  be- 
cause the  taxes  necessary  to  pay  the  bonds  would  if  collected 
be  a  transfer  of  the  property  of  individuals  to  aid  in  the  pro- 
jects of  gain  and  profit  of  others,  and  not  for  a  public  use  in 
the  proper  sense  of  that  term." 

Justice  Miller  says  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the 
Supreme  Court:  "To  lay  with  one  hand  the  power  of  govern- 
ernment  on  the  property  of  the  citizen,  and  with  the  other  to 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade. 


bestow  it  upon  favored  individuals  to  aid  private  enterprises 
and  build  up  private  fortunes  is  none  the  less  a  robbery  be- 
cause it  is  done  under  the  forms  of  law  and  is  called  taxation." 

Coulter  J.  in  "Northern  Liberties  vs.  St.  John's  Church" 
cited  in  the  same  case  says  very  forcibly,  "I  think  the  common 
mind  has  everywhere  taken  in  the  understanding  that  taxes 
are  a  public  imposition  levied  by  authority  of  the  government, 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  the  government  in  all  its 
machinery  and  operations — that  they  are  imposed  for  a  public 
purpose." 

The  peculiar  and  indirect  operation  of  the  protective  tax 
makes  it  difficult  to  recognize.  It  is  levied  at  the  frontier  or  at 
the  protected  persons'  factory .  The  people  pay  it  in  the  in- 
creased price  of  their  purchases.  They  do  not  see  that  every- 
thing they  use  is  thus  taxed  by  the  protective  system.  Every 
plow,  harrow,  nail,  horse  shoe,  piece  of  iron,  hat,  coat,  blanket 
or  bit  of  cloth  now  pays  tax  to  a  few  favored  persons,  to  the 
owners  of  the  protected  factories.  These  form  less  than  one 
per  cent,  of  the  total  population.  It  may  be  thought  that  the 
laborers  in  these  industries  who  compose  about  7  per  cent,  of 
the  population  receive  some  proportionate  tax  also,  but  the 
owners  pay  no  more  than  the  market  price  of  labor,  on  the 
contrary  taking  the  skill  required,  etc..  the  laborers  in  the  pro- 
tected industries  receive  less  annual  pay  than  those  in  the  free 
ones,  such  as  carpenters,  bricklayers,  locomotive  engineers, 
etc.,  and  are  often  altogether  out  of  work  or  on  one-half  time. 
The  laborers  employed  by  these  fa\rored  persons  cannot  then 
be  said  to  be  gamers  by  the  system. 

In  the  scheme  of  protection,  the  laboring  man's  commo- 
dity, that  is  to  say  labor  is  entirely  unprotected;  immigration 
and  competition  in  laborers  is  entirely  unfettered.  By  immi- 
gration and  the  importation  of  contract  labor  by  manufactur- 
ers, and  also  perhaps  on  account  of  the  narrow  and  inelastic 
protected  market,  prices  of  labor  in  some  protected  occupations 
are  less  to-day  according  to  some  authorities  than  in  England. 
The  standard  of  living  being  more  costly  here  than  there, 
these  workmen  are  doubly  injured. 

The  protectionists'  positions  should  be  carefully  examined 
to  discover  where  they  have  been  misled. 

They  say:    The  price  of   labor  is  higher  in  the  United 


The  Tariff. 


States  than  elsewhere.  American  industries  of  certain  kinds, 
therefore,  to  compete  with  foreign  industries,  must  have  a 
bounty;  or  a  tax  must  be  levied  on  the  people  of  their  own 
country,  the  larger  part  of  which  they,  the  manufacturers,  are 
to  collect.  Special  bounties  are  also  asked  and  given  to  ex- 
porters of  goods  made  here.  Thus  Americans  are  taxed  in 
this  last  case  and  pay  out  money  so  that  foreigners  can  buy 
goods  made  in  America  cheaper  than  they  can  be  bought  for 
in  America  by  the  tax  payers.  In  this  way  we  pay  taxes  that 
are  given  to  exporters  of  American  guns  to  enable  them  to 
sell  American  guns  cheaper  to  foreigners  than  tthey  can  be 
bought  for  at  home,  so  in  case  of  war  our  enemies  could  sup- 
ply themselves  with  our  improved  weapons  by  our  own  taxes, 
at  less  rates  than  we  ourselves  have  to  pay  for  them.  So  it  is 
with  sugar  and  a  number  of  other  things.  What  sense  is 
there  in  such  taxing  to  give  bounties  and  drawbacks  to  our 
large  manufacturers  so  that  American  products  are  made 
cheaper  to  foreigners  than  to  ourselves? 

This  high  labor  complained  of  by  the  protectionists  is  a 
state  of  affairs  that  it  cannot  interest  the  laborer  to  change. 
A  laboring  man  ought  certainly  not  to  complain  that  wages 
are  higher  in  his  own  residence  than  elsewhere. 

High  wages  not  only  indicate  a  good  condition  for  labor- 
ers but  also  for  capital.  High  wages  cannot  be  paid  unless 
enterprise  and  capital  are  also  well  paid.  High  wages  mean 
good  returns  to  the  employer,  else  he  could  not  pay  them. 
Therefore  all  capital  not  employed  in  industries  to  be  pro- 
tected and  all  labor  can  find  nothing  to  change  in  a  condition 
where  labor  is  high. 

From  five  to  seven  per  cent,  of  the  population  are  engaged 
in  enterprises  that  are  protected.  The  laborers  in  them,  ac- 
cording to  the  opening  statement  of  the  protectionist,  that 
because  labor  is  high  protection  is  needed,  are  not  interested 
in  protection.  It  is  only  the  few  owners  of  certain  industries 
that  are  to  be  benefited.  It  is  doubtful  whether  in  the  long 
run  even  this  small  portion  of  our  people  are  really  benefited. 
Such  men  among  them  as  John  D.  Wise,  the  largest  wool 
handler  in  California,  Abraham  S.  Hewitt,  one  of  the  largest 
iron  manufacturers  in  the  country,  and  the  late  Edward 
Harris,  the  largest  manufacturer  of  cassimeresin  New  England, 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade. 


had  some  time  since  come  to  believe  that  the  fetters  of  protec- 
tion diminished  in  the  end  the  home  market  and  almost 
entirely  cut  off  the  foreign  one.  $75,000,000  of  the  custom 
duties  collected  by  England  were  on  the  following  goods: 

Tobacco $42,948,405. 

Tea 20,848,165. 

Wine 7,348,550. 

Dried  Fruit 2,546,170. 

Coffee 2,060,010. 

Chicory 333,695. 

Chocolate  and  Cocoa 223,355. 

$75,306,350. 

None  of  these  articles  are  produced  in  England.  How  is 
it  then,  if  protection  is  really  beneficial  to  manufacturers,  that 
the  unprotected  manufacturers  of  England  paying  more  wages 
than  nearly,  if  not  every  country  with  which  they  trade, 
can  undersell  and  control  the  markets  of  the  world? 

The  protectionists  having  obtained  their  wishes  now  say, 
in  a  somewhat  inconsistent  way,  that  if  the  tariff  is  reduced  in 
the  least  then  labor  will  diminish  in  price.  This  position  was 
first  taken  by  the  employers  in  the  protected  districts  and  has 
been  much  insisted  on.  These  gentlemen  were  formerly  con- 
cerned about  the  highness  of  labor.  They  have  always  sought 
their  labor  at  the  lowest  figures,  even  importing  large  numbers 
of  persons  under  contract  to  work  for  them  at  extremely  low 
figures,  from  countries  in  a  distressed  condition,  as  Italy  and 
Hungary.  These  things  oblige  one  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of 
the  protectionist  employers,  either  when  talking  of  high  or  low 
wages.  With  all  possible  charity  we  are  forced  to  the  con- 
clusion that  it  is  in  no  sense  the  laborers'  interest,  but  that  it 
is  their  own  private  gain  that  induces  them  to  interest  them- 
selves in  politics,  to  secure  representatives  and  to  pay  lobbyists 
for  purposes  in  the  interest  of  which  no  delegation  of  working- 
men  has  ever  been  seen  in  Washington.  By  immigration  and 
this  importation  of  contract  labor,  as  has  been  said,  the  work- 
ing man  is  subjected  to  unrestricted  competition  and  is  paid 
the  lowest  price  the  risks  and  cost  of  importing  labor  will 
allow,  while  at  the  same  time  those  things  he  consumes  he 
must  pay  a  double  and  treble  price  for,  to  satisfy  the  tax  of 
the  protectionist.  The  proportion  of  foreign  operatives  to 


The  Tariff. 

American  operatives  employed  in  the  protected  industries  is 
increasing.  It  is  difficult  to  obtain  the  exact  figures  for  many 
places,  but  the  admirable  statistics  of  Massachusetts  obviates 
the  difficulty  in  that  state.  Here  are  the  facts  for  three  of  her 
manufacturing  towns: 

Native  Labor  Foreign  Labor 

Employed.  Employed. 

Fall  River 3,137  <),334 

Lowell 4,883  5,175 

Lawrence .  3,415  5,724 

By  our  protection  system  a  few  employers  are  protected, 
the  laborers  never. 

The  price  of  labor  is  mainly  regulated  by  the  ratio  of 
laborers  to  the  work  to  be  done.  No  considerable  employment 
of  labor  can  be  long  carried  on  in  a  country  at  a  different  price 
from  that  paid  in  other  industries  in  the  same  locality,  because 
labor  will  be  drawn  from  the  less  paying  ones  to  the  higher  un- 
til the  prices  are  equalized.  It  is  therefore  clear  that  the 
prices  paid  one  large  industry,  say  farming,  in  which  in  this 
country  more  than  half  the  population  are  engaged,  must 
regulate  the  prices  paid  in  all  others,  everything  else  being 
equal;  that  is,  the  capacity  required,  the  cost  of  apprentice- 
ship, the  dangers,  the  sanitary  condition,  etc.,  being  con- 
sidered, the  wages  with  these  compensations  must  be  the 
same.  Laborers  will  leave  the  ill-paid  occupations  for  the  bet- 
ter paid  until  any  inequality  is  corrected.  Taking  farming  in 
this  country,  we  may  ask  what  have  been  the  causes  of  the 
high  wages  that  have  been  the  nominal  reason  and  excuse  for 
protection.  There  are  three  clear  ones: 

1.  The   immense   cheap  capital  of  land  in  the  Public  Do- 
main which  has    always    been    demanding  labor  and  on  the 
most  favorable  terms. 

2.  The  free  institutions  and   security  of  property  that  have 
assured  every  workingman  that  his  earnings  were  safe,  and 

3.  The  freedom  of  trade  that  gives  everyone  full  liberty 
within   our   bounds   to   exchange  his    products  or  labor  with 
whom  he  pleases  and  for  what  he  likes. 

Every  man,  town,  county  and  State  in  this  great  Union  is 
as  free  as  air  to  do  with  its  own  what  it  pleases.  Here  in 
America  is  an  example  of  the  advantage  of  untramelled  trade. 
No  where  else  is  so  great  a  trade  carried  on  without  restric- 
tions. No  where  else  do  interests  more  diverse,  do  climates 


Protection  r*.  Fre*  Trade.  9 

wider  apart,  and  labor  conditions    more    unequal,  freely  ex- 
change with  each  other. 

Why  should  not  the  Lake  Superior  miner  need  as  much 
protection  from  the  copper  mines  of  Arizona  as  from  those  of 
Sonora,  or  vice  versa.  If  the  protectionist  position  is  correct 
it  can  make  but  little  difference  to  the  workman,  say  of  Lake 
Superior,  whether  the  competition  be  from  Arizona  or  Sonora, 
on  one  side  or  another  of  an  imaginary  line  dividing  us  from 
Mexico,  that  prevents  him  from  selling  his  American  copper 
in  America  at  four  cents  a  pound  more  than  he  sells  the  same 
American  copper  for  in  London,  as  has  been  the  case.  Our 
experience  of  protection  is  full  of  such  instances.  This  coun- 
try has  long  produced  more  copper  than  it  used.  A  protection 
tax,  however,  was  put  on  copper.  This  enabled,  until  recently, 
the  copper  miners  to  combine  and  fix  the  price  at  which  they 
would  sell  American  copper  to  Americans. 

The  surplus  was  exported  and  sold  in  London  in  competi- 
tion with  the  world.  The  result  was  that  for  a  series  of  years 
American  copper  sold  in  London  at  an  average  of  four  cents  a 
pound  less  than  without  the  ocean  voyage  it  sold  for  in  New 
York.  No  government  can  be  justified  in  doing  acts  of  this 
kind.  Arizona  has  in  a  measure  broken  up  this  business. 
Lake  Superior  should  ask  protection  as  much  against  Arizona 
as  elsewhere.  Would  the  natural  commercial  conditions  of 
Arizona  or  California  be  changed  by  their  being  under  the 
Mexican  or  an  independent  flag?  Would  such  a  change  make 
it  advisable  for  us  to  put  on  a  protective  tariff  against  the 
Eastern  States? 

By  a  logical  sequence  we  'see  ourselves  forced,  if  we  accept 
vhe  protective  theory,  to  give  sections  of  this  country,  having 
different  rates  of  labor,  etc.,  protection  against  others  more 
favorably  situated;  States  against  States,  counties  against 
counties,  towns  against  towns,  individuals  against  individuals. 
Thus  logically  followed  it  leads  us  to  absurdity.  Any  theory 
that  logically  followed  leads  to  absurdity  cannot  be  correct. 

If  any  protection  argument  is  correct,  California  should 
be  protected  against  Massachusetts  for  her  manufactures,  for 
labor  in  Massachusetts  is  lower  than  here;  against  Texas  for 
her  wool,  because  land  is  cheaper  in  Texas;  against  Nevada 
and  Arizona  for  minerals;  against  Oregon  for  lumber,  and  so 


10  The  Tariff. 

on  through  the  whole  list  of  our  productions.  Admitting  that 
the  protective  doctrines  are  correct  there  are  unanswerable 
reasons  against  the  continuance  of  the  American  Union.  The 
protective  system  calls  for  secession  of  states  from  our  grand 
Union  wherever  and  whenever  a  difference  in  wages  exists 
amongst  them.  Mr.  Elaine  has  seen  this  point  and  in  a  speech 
at  Pittsburg  called  the  attention  of  the  iron  workers  there  to 
the  natural  advantage  of  Alabama  for  iron  manufacture  on  ac- 
count of  the  proximity  of  natural  beds  of  iron  and  coal.  Mr. 
Elaine's  principal  statement  was  that  the  great  danger  to  Pitts- 
burg  lay  in  the  low  wages  paid  the  negro  workmen  in  Alabama. 
His  remedy  was  a  political  interference  in  the  affairs  of  Ala- 
bama to  stop  shot-gun  politics  to  which  he  attributed  the  al- 
leged low  wages.  Whether  shot-gun  politics  or  low  wages 
prevail  in  Birmingham,  Alabama,  I  do  not  know,  but  Mr. 
Elaine's  arguments,  failing  in  securing  his  remedy  would  inev- 
itably lead  to  secession  on  the  part  of  Pennsylvania  from  the 
Union  to  obtain  a  protective  tariff  against  Alabama. 

Protectionists  often  say  that  they  wished  everything  used 
in  the  United  States,  was  produced  here  and  that  nothing  was 
brought  in.  In  other  words,  the  legitimate  object  of  protection 
being  to  prevent  the  incoming  of  foreign  products,  that  end 
can  be  best  achieved  by  totally  prohibiting  their  importation, 
as  is  now  done  as  regards  ships.  This  is  the  extreme 
of  protection.  It  is  the  Chinese  wall.  This  suggests 
that  the  experience  of  China,  the  country  most  consistent  in 
protection  in  the  world,  and  only  allowing  foreign  goods  to  be 
brought  in  at  the  cannons'  mouth  to  certain  treaty  ports  where 
local  taxes  are  at  once  placed  on  all  goods  going  to  the  coun- 
try, has  not  been  to  increase  wages  very  much,  labor  costing 
from  3  to  12  cents  a  day  in  that  country.  From  this  instance 
it  is  plain  that  protection  does  not  always  increase  the  price  of 
labor. 

If  the  price  of  labor  in  farming  regulates  and  is  regulated 
by  other  home  industries  as  it  must  be,  we  may  well  look  at 
some  other  matters  that  must  have  a  regulative  influence  on 
that  industry.  The  farm  laborer  is  paid  not  only  with  refer- 
ence to  the  supply  of  labor  but  also  with  reference  to  the  re- 
turns derived  from  the  farm.  One  of  the  principal  of  these  is 
wheat.  The  surplus  of  wheat  is  sent  to  Liverpool,  and  the 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade.  11 


price  there  governs  that  of  the  wheat  in  all  countries,  having  a 
surplus  of  it.  The  American  wheat  has  to  be  sold  in  competi- 
tion with  the  free  trade  wheat  of  the  English  farmer,  the  price 
of  whose  labor  is  regulated  by  the  price  of  labor  in  other  Eng- 
lish industries.  Thus  we  see  that  the  American  iron  workers' 
wages  are  influenced  by  the  American  farm  hand,  and  he 
again  by  the  English  farm  hand  and  he  by  the  English  iron- 
worker, so  as  long  as  any  trade  exists  between  any  two  coun- 
tries, where  the  conditions  and  institutions  are  similar,  wages 
must  tend  to  approximate. 

If  this  position  is  correct  the  only  influence  protection  can 
have  had  is  to  have  diminished  the  rapidity  of  the  occupation 
of  the  public  domain  by  legitimate  settlers,  as  farmers,  and 
to  have  turned  these  persons  into  industries  that,  without 
protection,  would  have  been  less  renumerative ;  or  plainly,  the 
whole  people  have  been  and  are  taxed  to  enable  a  few  to  go  into 
what  these  claim  to  be  losing  business  ventures.  By  this 
means  the  productive  power  of  the  country,  as  far  as  it  is 
influenced,  is  turned  into  unproductive  channels,  and  the  whole 
wealth  of  the  country  must  be  diminished  and  the  wage  paying 
capacity  lessened.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  soon  as  the  great 
disturbance  of  labor  values  caused  by  the  late  civil  war  wag 
overcome,  the  price  of  labor  fell  and  doubtless  would  have 
continued  to  fall,  as  have  the  returns  on  capital,  except  perhaps 
those  of  a  few  favored  monopolists,  had  not  the  West  been  a 
spur  to  labor  prices. 

Under  protection  labor  has  often  diminished  in  value  and 
no  where  is  it  more  noticeable  than  in  the  protected  industries. 
Distress  among  the  laboring  classes,  and  consequent  disorders, 
always  in  recent  years  have  commenced  in  the  iron,  coal,  cot- 
ton and  other  protected  manufactures  and  fortunately,  in  many 
cases,  have  not  extended  beyond  them.  As  far  as  the  laborers 
in  these  industries  are  concerned,  trie  pampering  which  protec- 
tion has  given  and  the  bonuses  which  the  people  at  large  have 
been  forced  to  give  the  owners  of  these  industries,  has  not  proved 
favorable.  The  labor  disorders  amongst  the  protected  fac- 
tories and  the  continual  laying  off  at  half  time  of  their  la- 
borers makes  the  price  of  all  labor  more  or  less  uncertain. 
The  specialization  of  faculties  or  indoor  life,  one  or  the  other 
of  which  unfits  for  ready  change  of  occupation,  probably  pre- 


12  The  Tariff. 


vents  the  effect  of  the  irregularities  in  labor  pay  amongst  man- 
ufacturers from  being  more  rapidly  felt  amongst  the  people  at 
large  and  makes  the  price  paid,  so-called  protected  labor, 
often  the  lowest  paid  in  the  country.  General  labor  usually 
in  the  protected  districts  is  lower  than  for  the  same  occupa- 
tions elsewhere  in  the  country.  It  must  be  remembered  that 
the  articles  most  heavily  taxed  are  either  the  crude  materials 
of  manufacture  or  the  necessaries  of  life.  Of  these  latter  the 
laborer  must  use,  per  capita,  nearly  as  much  as  the  millionaire. 
Consequently  it  is  really  the  poor  who  pay  most  distressfully 
for  our  tariff. 

Capitalists  engaged  in  the  protected  manufactories  are 
doubtless  in  the  long  run  unfavorably  affected  by  this  system. 
We  hear  every  day  of  combinations  of  these  persons  who  agree  to 
limit  production,  running  on  one-quarter  or  on  one-half  time. 
Now  it  is  iron  which  is  made  in  quantities  less  than  the  plant 
devoted  to  its  production  warrants,  then  yarn,  etc.  The  last 
industry  agreeing  by  its  representatives  to  diminish  the  out- 
put and  keep  up  the  price  is  the  nail  industry.  Thus  the  cap- 
ital invested  when  the  works  are  run  on  half  time  only  brings 
in  half  returns  to  what  it  might  and  ought  were  the  industry  in 
a  healthy  condition.  When  we  think  of  the  large  amounts  of 
capital  thus  lying  idle  an  error  of  policy  must  be  suspected.  I 
must  here  call  attention  to  my  experience  in  regard  to  the  con- 
dition of  the.  laborers  engaged  in  the  protected  industries  in  the 
Middle  and  New  England  States. 

In  1877,  I  spent  the  summer  driving  in  a  wagon  over  por- 
tions of  these  States.  The  farming  communities  were  the 
healthy,  happy  and  moral  ones.  In  the  manufacturing  ones, 
even  in  villages,  the  laborers  lived  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in 
tenements.  They  looked  as  a  rule  pale  and  delicate.  The 
death  rate  was  higher  in  every  instance  where  I  could  obtain 
it.  The  children  were  wan  and  sickly  and  the  moral  tone  of 
the  laborers,  especially  of  the  young  girls,  was  deplorable. 
My  experience  was  that  the  filth,  unhappiness  disease,  igno- 
rance, over-crowding  and  immorality  in  these  States  was  so 
monopolized  by  the  manufacturing  centers  that  they  were  un- 
noticed elsewhere. 

The  political  and  moral  vigor  of  the  people  was  distinctly 
lower  in  these  centers  than  in  the  country.  We  may  recognize 


Frotedtion  vs.  Free  Trade.  13 


the  advantages  of  manufacturing  industries  as  compared  to  food 
producing  ones,  but  this  seems  to  me  clear:  the  food  produc- 
ing nation  must  be  the  most  independent,  for  everyone  must 
have  foed  and  the  condition  of  its  laborers  must  be  the  health- 
iest. 

In  California  for  some  years  the  number  of  sheep  hav- 
ing declined,  the  wool  output  is  less.  The  government  landg 
which  the  sheep-men  have  so  long  used  free  of  any  charge  for 
their  pasturage  are  being  rapidly  taken  up  by  settlers,  miners 
and  lumbermen.  This  is  more  injurious  to  the  wool  industry 
than  the  removal  of  the  whole  tariff  could  possibly  be.  But 
whether  the  people  of  the  State,  and  especially  the  irrigators, 
will  regret  the  absence  of  the  sheep-men  from  the  forests  is  a 
question.  The  shepherds  have  for  years  been  willfully  setting 
fires  in  the  forests  and  burning  and  destroying  riot  only  valu- 
able timber  worth  ten  times  more  than  all  the  sheep  that  ever 
went  into  the  mountains,  but  also  destroying  the  water  holding 
power  of  the  water-sheds  and  the  reproductive  capacity  of  the 
forests  themselves.  Vast  desolate  sheep  walks  and  burning 
forests  are  against  the  best  interests  of  the  land  owners  of 
California  and  still  more  against  the  interests  of  the  people 
generally. 

Much  of  the  ranch  land  formerly  used  as  sheep-walks  is 
now  in  farms  and  orchards  and  towns.  The  lands  of  the  wool 
men  have  in  consequence  of  this  change  in  use  increased 
greatly  in  value,  nevertheless  these  persons  wish  to  arrest  the 
process.  Their  plan  is  to  put  on  more  duties  or  tariff  on  wool, 
and  they  are  bitter  against  a  reduction  of  any  sort  or  kind  in 
the  wool  duties. 

There  is  one  of  two  results  that  must  be  aimed  at  in  this 
agitation.  The  one  is  that  no  more  land  shall  be  divided  into 
farms,  orchards,  etc.,  and  that  the  sheep  industry  shall  be 
maintained  in  its  present  condition  as  to  number  of  animals, 
wool  output  and  lands  occupied.  The  other  is  that  the  old 
time  prosperity  of  the  industry  shall  be  re-established  and 
that  all  former  sheep-walks  shall  become  sheep-walks  again, 
which  would  necessitate  the  suppression  of  the  farms,  orchards, 
colonies  and  towns  established  on  what  may  be  termed  the 
ruins  of  the  wool  industry. 

Tariffs  or  bonuses  to  establish  the  last  result  would  be  too 


14  The  Tariff. 


onerous  to  be  borne.  Tariffs  to  be  given  the  sheep-men  to  pro- 
duce the  first  would  be  a  tax  on  the  American  people  including 
those  of  this  State  to  arrest  the  progress  of  California.  The 
wool  men  themselves  do  not  really  want  the  results  their  de- 
mands would  bring  about,  much  less  does  any  one  else. 

A  plain  statement  of  the  wool  tariff  or  no  wool  tariff  is 
this: 

Wool  Tariff,  sheep-walks,  desolate  dusty  plains,  coyotes, 
vultures,  a  scanty  population  of  bachelor  shepherds,  half 
crazed  with  loneliness,  and  two  or  three  weeks  of  labor  for  a 
band  of  Indian  shearers,  a  few  wealthy  owners  of  vast  landed 
estates  and  burning  forests. 

No  Tariff,  farms,  orchards,  colonies  and  towns,  remunera- 
tive labor  for  families  and  small  land  holdings,  smiling  val- 
leys, schools  and  improvement. 

Choose. 

This  wool  tariff  is  said  to  be  for  the  benefit  of  labor.  It  is 
an  industry  which  probably  gives  less  chance  for  labor  than 
any  other  of  which  this  country  is  capable.  Besides  the 
condition  of  those  engaged  in  it,  is  to  the  last  extent  misera- 
ble. A  herder  gets  small  pay  and  must  find  himself.  Often 
for  months  he  does  not  see  a  human  being,  his  supplies  being 
left  by  a>  ranch  team  at  his  night  corral,  where  the  herder 
never  is  during  the  day. 

The  lonely  life  of  the  shepherds  makes  them  cranky,  and 
it  is  said  that  this  class  furnishes  a  larger  proportion  of  insane 
than  any  other  in  the  State.  I  have  not  investigated  this 
statement,  but  from  personal  experience  I  can  say  that  sheep 
herders  as  a  rule  are  queer  and  peculiar  to  such  an  extent  as 
to  lead  me  to  think  them  likely  to  furnish  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  insane  to  our  asylums.  Marriage  with  them  is  practi- 
cally imposible.  Labor  can  have  nothing  to  gain  to  be  driven 
by  taxation  into  such  occupations.  Nor  can  the  citizen  be 
benefited  by  allowing  the  great  landed  wool-growers  to  tax  him 
to  prevent  improvement,  and  still  less  is  such  a  scheme  of  bene- 
fit to  the  larger  land  owner.  With  other  and  better  occupa- 
tions the  population  will  increase,  the  value  of  land  must  rise 
and  the  citizen  must  become  richer.  The  tariff  on  wool  has 
another  effect;  it  kills  any  chance  for  a  foreign  market,  not  only 
for  wool  but  for  every  thing  made  from  it  as  well,  and  thus  the 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade  15 

strength  of  the  manufacturers  who  buy  wool  is  weakened  and 
its  only  market  becomes  uncertain. 

The  wool  industry  cannot  continue  as  it  is  and  the  coun- 
try progress  as  well.  The  wool  industry  must  change  and  the 
raising  of  sheep  become  intensified  just  as  farming  is  coming 
to  be  done  on  a  smaller  scale  and  in  a  better  way. 

We  all  of  us  rejoice  at  increased  rapidity  of  travel  by  land 
and  sea  and  agitate  for  lower  freight,  being  delighted  when 
competition  compels  it.  We  fire  -cannon  and  hurrah  when  a 
railroad  takes  the  place  of  mule  trains  or  wagons  whereby 
time  is  saved  and  freight  and  risk  diminished.  We  thus  re- 
joice at  the  removal  of  natural  tariffs  and  at  the  lowering  of 
insurance,  interest  and  freight.  A  new  railroad  to  Mexico,  or 
steamship  line  to  foreign  lands  is  hailed  with  acclamation,  al- 
though the  natural  tariff  between  foreign  countries  and  our 
own  is  thus  lowered.  Is  it  not  strange  that  some  should  re- 
joice at  the  imposition  of  artificial  tariffs  which  neutralize  the 
benefits  of  freight  rates,  etc.,  lowered  by  steamers  and  rail- 
roads over  which  they  have  already  shouted? 

There  are  duties  upon  several  other  imported  articles  pro- 
duced in  California,  such  as  lumber,  raisins,  etc.  Let  us  con- 
sider some  of  these.  The  duty  on  lumber  encourages  the 
rapid  destruction  of  our  forest.  Is  it  not  to  the  true  interest  of 
the  people  to  manage  the  forests  more  conservatively,  to  so  cut 
our  timber  as  to  insure  a  renewed  growth  for  future  supply,  to 
prevent  fires  and  above  all  things,  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  our 
water  sheds  so  that  our  springs  and  streams  will  not  dry  up, 
and  torrents  form  to  cover  the  valleys  with  debris?  We  know 
from  history  that  many  lands  once  well  watered  from 
wooded  hills  and  containing  fertile  valleys  and  plains,  are 
now  largely  desert  and  desolate,  owing  to  the  removal  of  the 
forests,  and  consequent  disappearance  of  permanent  water. 
Such  lands  exist  in  parts  of  Asia  and  along  the  shores  of  the 
Mediterranean.  Once  well  watered  from  wooded  hills,  these 
places  are  now  alternately  desolated  by  raging  torrents  from 
the  bared  slopes  incapable  of  holding  water,  or  parched  with  a 
drouth  which  vegetation  cannot  endure.  Mountains  well  timbered 
will  hold  water  and  give  it  out  slowly  in  springs  and  streams. 
Mountains  bare  will  not  hold  water,  but  shed  it  off  like  the 
roof  of  a  house.  Thus  a  watershed  receiving  ten  billion  gal- 


16  The  Tariff. 


Ions  of  water,  if  wooded,  may  deliver  it  over  a  period  of  a 
year,  while  a  bare  mountain  watershed  may  deliver  their  supply 
in  a  day.  In  one  case  you  have  beauty  and  fertility,  and  in 
the  other  desolation  and  danger.  The  lumber  tariff  also  en- 
courages a  lumber  pool,  or  trust,  that  though  in  command  of 
the  finest  forests  in  the  whole  world,  charges  the  people  of  Cal- 
ifornia the  most  exorbitant  prices  for  lumber.  The  price  of 
rough  lumber  is  now  $30  per  M.  in  Los  Angeles.  What  does 
the  State  gain  by  such  an  absurd  policy?  It  is  true  a  few 
lumbermen  are  becoming  millionaires,  but  how  about  the  house 
builders,  box  makers,  wagon-makers,  ship  builders,  etc.?  The 
lumber  tariff  makes  us  pay  through  the  nose  for  a  prime  neces- 
sity, while  encouraging  a  wasteful  and  senseless  destruction  of 
the  forests  and  of  their  reproductive  power  which  will  destroy 
all  future  lumber  supply  and  through  the  impairment  of  water 
sheds,  will  everlastingly  make  a  desert  of  our  beautiful  and 
now  fertile  state. 

The  raisin  industry  is  now  only  in  its  infancy  in  California. 
The  interior  valleys  of  this  State  are  better  suited  to  the  pro- 
duction of  raisins  both  in  soil,  climate,  and  water  supply  than 
any  other  part  of  the  world.  This  State  is  capable  of  sup- 
porting fifty  millions  of  people.  Raisin  growing  will  be  one  of 
the  best  industries  in  which  an  increasing  population  can  en- 
gage. But  we  now  produce  with  our  few  scattered  raisin  dis- 
tricts nearly  as  many  boxes  as  were  imported  before  any 
raisins  were  grown  here.  The  importation  is  now  less  than 
five  hundred  thousand  boxes.  We  can,  and  with  a  healthy 
and  unhandicapped  industry,  will  supply  the  world  with 
raisins  in  a  few  years  more.  What  then  is  all  this  codling 
about?  It  can  only  weaken  the  industry  as  codling  does  every- 
thing. Let  the  industry  grow  in  a  healthy,  natural  and  sound 
way,  and  do  not  tax  and  injure  the  whole  people  only  to  injure 
in  the  long  run  the  raisin  growers  also.  With  a  heavy  tax  on 
all  his  agricultural  implements,  on  all  iron  as  horseshoes,  etc., 
on  sugar,  except  from  Haiwaii,  on  boxes,  on  nails,  on  the  lum- 
ber in  his  houses,  barns  and  fences,  on  his  labels,  on  his  pack- 
ing paper,  on  fuel,  in  fact,  on  everything  he  uses,  the  raisin 
man  is  handicapped  in  his  own  home  market,  and  fatally  so  in 
foreign  markets.  We  find  to-day  all  our  large  industries  handi- 
capped in  the  same  way.  The  result  has  been  to  force  them 


Protection  vs.  Free   Trade.  1 


into  combinations  or  trusts  which  protect  them  against  home 
competition,  but  which  fleece  unmercifully  the  people.  Agri- 
culture, including  raisin  growing,  is,  in  my  opinion,  incapable 
of  this  means  of  self-protection  against  the  Upas  influence  of 
the  unsound  tariff.  In  the  first  place,  the  natural  instinct  of 
countrymen  is  against  combination  to  take  unfair  advantage  of 
the  people,  and  in  the  second  place  you  can  not  pay  a  man  to 
stop  producing  from  his  orchard  or  vineyard,  or  only  to  pro- 
duce a  limited  quantity  from  it,  because  he  can  not  neglect 
such  property  without  its  deteriorating  in  value  and  if  he  keeps 
his  orchards  up.  nature,  and  not  he,  will  govern  the  product. 
The  farmer  is  in  an  entirely  different  position  from  the  manu- 
facturer, and  he  probably  never  can  combine  against  his  fellow 
men  as  these  do  and  as  the  tariff  forces  them  to  do. 

All  our  fruit  interests  are  handicapped  and  injured  by  the 
tariff  on  the  articles  the  producers  use.  Any  temporary  benefit. 
even  a  special  tariff  may  appear  to  give,will  and  must,in  the  long 
run,  injure  them.  AVe  are  already  commencing  to  export  fruit, 
green,  dried  and  canned,  from  California,  and  were  our  boxes, 
nails,  tin,  sugar,  etc.,  untariffed  this  export  would  doubtless 
take  a  great  development  and  encourage  the  increased  planting 
of  orchards,  etc.  If  California  becomes  the  great  horticultural 
State  her  soil  and  climate  make  possible,  she  must  have  the 
world  for  a  market  and  this  she  cannot  have  with  a  vexatious 
and  destructive  tariff  such  as  now  exists. 

A  few  years  ago  the  price  of  raisins  was  very  low,  while 
this  was  the  case  part  of  the  tariff  on  imported  raisins  was  tak- 
en off.  I  was  in  Fresno  at  the  time  and  recollect  very  well  the 
outcry  raised  that  every  raisin  vineyard  in  California  would 
have  to  be  rooted  up  and  burned  for  fire  wood.  Since  the  re- 
moval of  the  duty  the  price  of  raisins  has  recovered  while  at  the 
same  time  a  large  increase  of  production  has  taken  place.  The 
Spaniards  and  Italians  already  recognize  that  they  can  not 
hope  to  hold  the  American  market  in  fruits,  tariff  or  no  tariff, 
against  California,  and  official  reports  have  been  made  to  these 
governments  to  this  effect.  This  illustrates  the  difficulty  of  un- 
derstanding cause  and  effect  in  political  economy  and  the  dan- 
ger of  violating  well  recognized  economic  orinciples  for  appar- 

-pecial  gain. 

I  am   a  farmer,  fruit  grower,  and  raisin  grower  and  I  be- 


18  The  Tariff. 


lieve  that  I  would  be  better  off  without  the  tariffs  on  fruit  even 
though  other  tariffs  admitted  to  be  detrimental  to  my  class 
were  retained.  There  can  be  no  question  that  a  general  revis- 
ion of  the  tariff  would  prove  of  benefit  to  us  and  to  the  state. 
The  heaviest  protected  industries  are  those  of  lumber,  coal,  tin 
and  iron.  Merchantable  coal,  tin  or  iron  are  not  produced  in 
this  state.  The  freight  tariff'  on  the  railroad  forces  us  to  import 
these  articles  by  sea  from  other  countries .  Thus  all  manu- 
ring industries  in  this  state  are  injured  with  no  coal  or  iron 
monopoly  to  benefit.  How  can  California  profit  by  this? 

The  fruit  protectionist  of  California  is  in  an  amusingly  awk- 
ward position.  In  Congress  he  says  that  the  removal  of  the 
small  duty  on  oranges  or  the  -J  cent  a  pound  on  raisins  will 
ruin  completely  his  industry.  To  the  Eastern  man  who  comes 
to  buy  his  orchard  or  vineyard  he  says:  From  this  vineyard  of 
raisin  grapes  I  have  netted  from  $200  to  $600  an  acre  per  year, 
from  this  orange  orchard  I  net  from  $400  to  $1,000  a  year  per 
acre.  To  use  an  informal  expression,  "There  is  a  nigger  in  the 
wood-pile"  here. 

Something  should  be  said  about  labor,  for  one  of  the  pos- 
itions of  the  protectionists  is  that  a  high  labor  country  cannot 
compete  in  its  products  with  a  low  labor  country.  Nothing 
could  be  more  contrary  to  experience.  Countries  with  high 
priced  labor,  unless  artificial  restrictions  prevent,  have  always 
been  able  to  undersell  countries  with  low  priced  labor.  Of 
course  products  depending  on  climatic  conditions  are  exceptions. 
The  reason  for  this  is  that  high  paid  laborers  are  as  a  rule  more 
efficient  than  low  paid  ones  and  enough  more  so  to  make  their 
product  cheaper.  Immigrants  accustomed  to  low  wages  in 
their  own  country  become  more  efficient  here  under  our  higher 
wages,  and  according  to  the  statements  of  some  of  them  to  me, 
and  to  my  observation  of  others,  the  difference  in  their  work  ac- 
complished, amounts  to  more  than  the  difference  in  their  pay. 
Thus  the  labor  account  in  high  wage  countries  is  often  less  in 
the  price  of  production  of  articles  than  it  is  in  low  ones.  Thos. 
Brassey,  who  was  a  contractor,  and  who  built  railroads  in  India, 
Russia,  England  etc.,  has  stated  that  the  cost  of  moving  a  yard 
of  earth  was  highest  in  the  cheap  labor  countries,  and  cheapest 
in  the  dear  labor  ones.  In  our  own  country,  we  now  know  that 
cotton  is  produced  cheaper  under  free  labor  with  wages,  than 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade  19 

it  was  under  slave  labor,  where  a  mere  subsistence  was  given, 
and  no  wages  were  paid  at  all. 

I  do  not  think  that  slave  or  pauper  labor  can  ever  compete 
with  free  labor  in  a  fair  contest.  If  the  food  is  poor  and  ambi- 
tion is  lacking,  the  laborer  will  fall  off  in  efficiency.  In  my 
own  business  experience  in  Turkey,  I  have  found  four  and  five 
men  necessary  to  do  what  one  man  did  in  New  York,  and 
though  the  individual  laborer  was  paid  less  in  Turkey  than  in 
New  York,  the  labor  account  was  highest  in  Turkey.  There 
are  doubtless  times  and  places  where  this  is  not  true,  but  as  a 
rule  it  is  true.  Here  in  this  country,  I  think  that  every  em- 
ployer of  labor  will  agree  with  me  that  within  certain  reason- 
able limits,  well  paid  labor  is  cheaper  in  producing  than  is  poor 
paid  labor. 

The  welfare  of  our  laborers  should,  indeed,  engage  the  at- 
tention of  statesmen.  On  them  depends  the  integrity  and 
maintenance  of  our  free  institutions.  Labor  alone  can  save  us. 
In  my  opinion  the  hours  of  labor  should  be  reasonably  regulat- 
ed. The  employment  of  women  and  children  should  be  care- 
fully looked  after  to  secure  them  from  moral  and  physical  in- 
jury. The  unsanitary  condition  of  trades  and  manufactories 
should  be  made  less  destructive  to  health  and  life,  than  most 
of  them  now  are.  Any  one,  noting  the  heavy  death-rates  and 
short  length  of  life  in  many  employments,  will  appreciate  the 
necessity  of  some  action  of  this  kind  in  the  interest  of  labor 
and  of  the  people.  For  instance,  one  set  of  statistics  I  have, 
shows  the  average  age  at  death  of  farmers  to  be  65  years,  while 
that  of  women  operatives  in  cotton  mills  in  the  same  district  is 
placed  at  only  22  years.  Here  is  a  vast  difference.  The  women 
operatives  must  be  considered  before  the  employer,  but  the  em- 
ployer is  also  interested  in  putting  an  end  to  such  a  state  of 
affairs,  even  should  he  leave  humanitarian  feeling  out,  for  death 
always  means  previous  sickness  and  inefficiency  in  the  opera- 
tive and  also  means  sickness  and  inefficiency  in  from  five  to 
ten  other  operatives.  One  death  means  this  amount  of  sick- 
ness in  others.  We  can  not  give  too  much  attention  to  the 
welfare  both  moral  and  physical  of  our  laborers,  and  everything 
consistent  with  their  manhood  and  the  maintainance  of  their 
self-respect  and  self-reliance  should  be  done  for  them.  I  never 
wish  to  see  the  price  of  labor  lower  in  this  country  than  it  is  to- 


20  The  Tariff. 


day,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  the  lowering  of  laboi*  pay  would 
in  the  long  run  cheapen  production.  The  history  of  industries 
shows  the  contrary,  for  while  the  wages  of  labor  in  the  civiliz- 
ed world  has  increased,  the  cost  of  production  has  diminished. 
We  must  see  to  it  that  our  laborers  are  kept  independent,  in 
telligent  and  able  to  raise  families.  They  must  not  be  driven 
to  the  ragged  edge  of  misery  and  hopelessness. 

What  protection  does  for  labor  it  is  indeed  difficult  to  see. 
It  certainly  curtails  the  exchange  value  of  the  laborer's  wages 
and  causes  him  to  pay  more  for  what  he  uses  than  would  oth- 
erwise be  the  case.  The  tendency  of  wages  in  the  Eastern 
states  has  been  downward,  and  it  is  only  the  active  develop- 
ment of  the  new  west  that  prevents  this  fact  from  becoming 
apparent.  In  the  middle  west  the  farmers  have  been  unable 
to  pay  the  tariff  taxes  and  by  mortgages  and  otherwise  they 
are  fast  becoming  a  tenant  class.  The  condition  of  the  farmers 
in  the  Central  Western  states  should  command  the  attention  of 
every  patriotic  person.  We  can  not  afford  to  see  our  farmers 
lose  their  independence  and  prosperity,  as  they  must  do  should 
they  become  a  tenant  class  like  the  agriculturists  of  Ireland. 
This  is  now  the  tendency  in  large  districts  of  our  country  and 
has  been  complained  of  by  many  farmers'  organizations,  not- 
ably by  that  of  Nebraska. 

With  our  farmers  becoming  tenants,  and  the  moral  and 
material  condition  of  so  many  classes  of  operatives  in  this 
country  opposed  to  the  reproduction  of  an  improved  race,  we 
have  arrived  at  a  point  where  we  ought  to  stop  all  injustice 
and  legislation  of  a  class  character,  or  of  showing  favoritism 
to  persons,  and  we  should  direct  our  thoughts  and  energies  to 
correcting  the  present  conditions  which  have  brought  this  state 
of  affairs  about. 

We  must  not  force  our  farmers  into  hopeless  bankruptcy, 
we  must  not  force  our  laborers  into  hopeless  poverty.  Poor 
girls  driven  to  prostitution  will  not  make  mothers  of  a  sound, 
strong  people.  Fathers  on  the  verge  of  starvation  cannot  be 
fathers  to  improved  children.  Such  men  will  form  the  nucleus 
of  anarchy  and  disorder  already  showing  its  horrid  head  in  our 
free  land. 

The  misery  of  the  poor  in  our  manufacturing  centers, 
the  increasing  lateness  of  marriage,  the  diminishing  ratio  of 


Protection  rs.  Free   Trade.  21 

births  to  deaths,  the  increase  of  prostitution  among  young  wo- 
men, the  increase  of  insane  greater  in  proportion 
than  the  increase  of  our  population,  the  condition  of  our  farm- 
ers, all  these  things  show  us  that  something  ia  wrong  that  needs 
prompt  correction.  Whatever  part  the  tariff  plays  in  this 
tragedy  of  error  it  has  been  coincident  with  its  growth  in  our 
country's  history. 

There  is  one  other  point  of  the  many  that  might  be 
brought  up  to  which  I  will  allude  and  that  is  our  Export 
Trade.  The  protectionist  favors  exportation  and  often  is  will- 
ing to  give  bounties  to  secure  it,  while  opposing  Importation. 
It  does  seem  strange  that  sensible  men  cannot  see  that  expor- 
tation, is  impossible  without  importation.  Shall  the  farmer 
give  away  his  products?  Shall  we  fruit  men  who  soon  expect  to 
be  exporters  of  dried  and  canned  fruits  give  our  products  away? 
We  cannot  do  it.  How  then  shall  we  export?  We  must  take 
from  the  foreigner  what  we  most  want  with  which  he  is  willing 
to  part.  We  must  exchange  with  him  and  the  more  we  get  the 
better  off  we  are.  Money  is  a  mere  tool  of  exchange  or  com- 
merce and  can  never  be  continuously  exported  too  or  from  a 
country  exclusively,  unless  it  be  as  a  mining  commodity.  If 
money  were  continuously  imported  to  a  country  the  value  of 
money  would  fall,  the  price  of  goods  would  consequently  rise 
until  a  point  was  reached  where  the  export  of  goods  would  be 
impossible.  The  price  of  the  exported  goods,  they  being  a 
surplus,  would  of  course  rise  last  and  not  until  there  was 
no  surplus.  Those  producing  these  would  suffer  first,  through 
the  increased  price  of  what  they  used,  and  second,  through  the 
diminished  foreign  price  of  what  they  produced.  For  the  ex- 
portation of  money  from  the  foreign  country  would  increase  the 
price  of  money  and  consequently  diminish  the  price  of  goods 
in  the  country  exporting  money.  A  point  would  soon  be  reached 
where  trade  between  countries  dealing  in  this  way,  with  no 
roundabout  returns  through  other  countries,  would  cease.  It  is 
therefore  clear  that  if  we  are  to  export  we  must  import,  and 
that  trammels  and  tariffs  on  imports,  are  fully  to  an  equal  ex- 
tent trammels  on  exports. 

Henry   George     has   shown  up  one  protectionist  article  of 
faith  so  cleverly  that  I  cannot  refrain  from  quoting  him: 

"Here,   in  substance,  is  the   argument   which   has  been   ad- 


22  The   Tariff. 

dresssed  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  from  the  time  when 
we  became  a  nation  to  the  present  day:  Manufacturing  coun- 
tries are  always  rich  countries.  Countries  that  produce  only 
raw  materials  are  always  poor.  Therefore,  if  we  would  be 
rich,  we  must  have  manufactures;  we  must  encourage  them. 

"To  many,  this  argument  seems  plausible,  especially  as 
the  taxes  for  the  'encouragement'  of  the  protected  industries  are 
levied  in  such  a  way  that  their  payment  is  not  realized.  But 
I  could  make  as  good  an  argument  to  the  people  of  the  little 
town  of  Jamaica,  near  which  I  am  now  living,  in  support  of  a 
.subsidy  to  a  theatre.  I  could  say  to  them : 

"All  large  cities  have  theatres,  and  the  more  theatres  it  has, 
the  larger  the  city.  Look  at  New  York,  New  York  has  more 
theatres  than  any  other  city  in  America,  and  is  consequently 
the  greatest  city  in  America.  Philadelphia  ranks  next  to  New 
York  in  the  number  and  size  of  its  theatres,  and  therefore 
<comes  next  to  New  York  in  population  arid  wealth.  So, 
^throughout  the  country,  whenever  you  find  large,  well  appoint- 
ed, theatres,  you  will  find  large  and  prosperous  towns,  while 
•where  there  are  no  theatres  the  towns  are  small.  Is  it  any 
wonder  that  Jamaica  is  so  small  and  grows  so  slowly  when  it 
lias  no  theatres  at  all?  People  do  not  like  to  settle  in  a  place 
where  they  cannot  occasionally  go  to  the  theatre.  If  you  want 
Jamaica  to  thrive  you  must  take  steps  to  build  a  fine  theatre, 
which  will  attract  a  large  population.  Look  at  Brooklyn :  Brooklyn 
was  only  a  small  river-side  village  before  its  people  had  the  en- 
terprise to  start  a  theatre,  and  sec  now,  since  they  began  to 
build  theatres,  how  large  a  city  Brooklyn  has  become.' 

"Modeling  my  argument  on  that  addressed  to  American 
voters  by  the  Presidential  candidate  of  the  Republican  party  in 
1884,  I  might  then  drop  into  'statistics,'  and  point  to  the  fact 
that  when  theatrical  representations  first  began  in  this  country, 
its  population  did  not  amount  to  a  million;  that  it  was  totally 
destitute  of  railroads,  and  without  a  single  mile  of  telegraph 
wire.  Such  has  been  our  progress  since  theatres  were  intro- 
duced that  the  census  of  1880  showed  that  we  had  50,155,783 
people,  97,907  miles  of  railroad,  and  291,212  9-10  miles  of  tele- 
graph wires.  Or  I  might  go  into  greater  detail,  as  the  protec- 
tionist statisticians  are  accustomed  to  do.  I  might  take  the 
date  of  the  building  of  each  of  the  New  York  theatres,  give  the 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade.  23 

wealth  and  population  of  the  city  at  that  time,  and  then  by  rep- 
resenting the  statistics  of  population  and  wealth  a  few  years 
later,  show  that  the  building  of  each  theatre  had  been  followed 
by  a  marked  increase  in  population  and  wealth. 

lll  might  point  out  that  San  Francisco  had  not  a  theatre 
until  the  Americans  came  there,  and  was  consequently  but  a 
struggling  village,  that  the  new-comers  immediately  set  up 
theatres  and  maintained  them  more  generously  than  any  other 
similar  population  in  the  world,  and  that  the  consequence  was 
the  marvellous  growth  of  San  Francisco.  I  might  show  that 
Chicago  and  Denver  and  Kansas  City,  all  remarkably  good 
theatre  towns,  have  also  been  remarkable  for  their  rapid  growth? 
and,  as  in  the  case  of  New  York,  prove  statistically  that  thfc 
building  of  each  theatre  these  cities  contain  has  been  followed 
by  an  increase  of  population  and  wealth. 

"Then,  stretching  out  after  protectionist  fashion  into  the 
historical  argument,  I  might  refer  to  the  fact  that  Nineveh  and 
Babylon  had  no  theatres  that  we  know. of,  and  so  went  to  utter 
ruin;  dilate  upon  the  fondness  of  the  ancient  Greeks  for  theat- 
rical entertainments  conducted  at  public  expense,  and  their 
consequent  greatness  in  arts  and  aims;  point  out  how  the  Ro- 
mans went  even  further  than  the  Greeks  in  the  encouragement 
of  the  theatre,  and  built  at  public  cost,  the  largest  theatre  in 
the  world,  and  how  Rome  became  the  mistress  of  the  nations. 
And  to  embellish  and  give  point  to  the  argument  I  might,  per- 
haps, drop  into  poetry,  recalling  Byron's  lines, 

'When  falls  the  Coliseum,  Rome  shall  fall ; 
And  when  Koine  falls — the  world.' 

Recovering  from  this,  I  might  cite  the  fact  that  in  every  prov- 
ince they  conquered,  the  Romans  established  theatres,  as  ex- 
plaining the  remarkable  facility  with  which  they  extended  their 
•civilization  and  made  the  conquered  provinces  integral  parts  of 
their  great  empire;  point  out  that  the  decline  of  these  theatres 
and  the  decay  of  Roman  power  and  civilization  went  on  togeth- 
er; and  that  the  extinction  of  the  theatre  brought  on  the  night 
of  the  Dark  Ages.  Dwelling  then  a  moment  upon  the  rudeness 
-and  ignorance  of  that  time  when  there  were  no  theatres,  I 
might  triumphantly  point  to  the  beginning  of  modern  civiliza- 
tion as  contemporaneous  with  the  revival  of  theatrical  enter- 
tainments in  miracle-plays  and  court  masques.  And  showing 


24  The  Tariff. 


how  these  plays  and  masques  were  always  supported  by  monas- 
teries, municipalities,  and  princes,  and  how  places  where  they 
began  became  sites  of  great  cities,  I  could  laud  the  wisdom  of 
'encouraging  infant  theatricals.'  Then  in  the  fact  that  English 
actors,  until  recently,  styled  themselves  her  Majesty's  servants, 
and  that  the  Lord  Chamberlain  still  has  authority  over  the 
English  boards,  and  must  license  plays  before  they  can  be  acted, 
I  could  trace  to  a  national  system  of  subsidizing  infant  theat- 
ricals the  foundation  of  England's  greatness.  Coming  back  to 
our  own  times,  I  could  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  Paris, 
where  theatres  are  still  subsidized  and  actors  still  draw  their 
salaries  from  the  public  treasury,  is  the  world's  metropolis  of 
fashion  and  art,  steadily  growing  in  population  and  wealth, 
though  other  parts  of  the  same  country  which  do  not  enjoy  sub- 
sidized theatres  are  either  at  a  stand-still  or  declining.  And 
finally  I  could  point  to  the  astuteness  of  the  Mormon  leaders, 
who  early  in  the  settlement  of  Salt  Lake  built  a  spacious- 
theatre,  and  whose  little  village  in  the  sage-brush,  then 
hardly  as  large  as  Jamaica,  has  since  the  building  of  this 
theatre  grown  to  be  a  populous  and  beautiful  city,  and  indig- 
nantly ask  whether  the  virtuous  people  of  Jamaica  should  al- 
low themselves  to  be  out  done  by  wicked  polygamists. 

"If  such  an  argument  would  not  induce  the  Jamaicans  to 
tax  themselves  to  'encourage'  a  theatre,  would  it  not  at  least  be 
as  logical  as  arguments  that  have  induced  the  American  people 
to  tax  themselves  to  encourage  manufactures?" 

As  Mr.  Watterson  expresses  it  this  is  a  complete  and 
felicitous  exposure  of  one  protection  argument. 

One  curious  comment  on  the  protective  doctrine  is  that  to- 
day in  California  in  the  face  of  free  sugar  from  Hawaii  large 
enterprise  are  about  to  be  started  to  manufacture  sugar  from 
beets  and  this  too  in  the  face  of  the  general  handicap  the  pro- 
tective tariff  places  on  all  outside  industries. 

If  one  hundred  years  of  free  land,  free  institutions  and  free 
education  have  not  been  capable  of  making  the  American  people 
competent  to  compete  in  a  fair  industrial  fight  with  slaves  and 
paupers  then  these  institutions  are  not  the  best  for  us  to  have 
and  they  must  be  condemned  as  a  failure. 

One  of  the  arguments  offered  by  those  who  would  convince 
the  laboring  man  that  it  is  to  his  interest  as  well  as  to  that  of 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trcn'c.  25 

the  monopolist  to  have  protection,  is  that  labor  is  higher  in  this 
country  than  in  Free  trade  England.  Protection  being  in  force 
here  is  the  cause  of  the  higher  wages  paid  in  America.  While 
Free  Trade  being  the  rule  in  England  is  the  cause  of  the  lower 
wages  said  to  be  paid  there. 

This  argument  is  of  doubtful  value.  In  the  first  place  the 
condition  of  the  population,  the  number  to  the  square  mile« 
the  different  land  and  social  systems  etc.  makes  a  comparison  cf 
America  with  England,  to  ascertain  the  comparative  value  of  eco- 
nomic methods,  unreliable.  In  England  the  land  system  is  a 
monopolist  system,  transfers  are  cumberscm  and  costly  while  in 
this  country  transfers  and  subdivisions  of  real  property  are 
quick  and  easy,  and  we  still  have  a  considerable  amount  of 
free  land  within  the  reach  of  the  people.  In  one  country  a 
vast  army  and  navy  is  supported,  not  found  necessary  in  the 
other.  In  many  other  matters  equal  diversity  exists  between 
the  two  countries.  England  is  an  old  country  with  a  dense 
population,  while  America  is  a  new  one  only  commencing  to 
fill  its  splendid  empire.  To  a  reasonable  person  a  comparison 
to  ascertain  the  affects  of  free  trade  or  protection  would  be  more 
correct  if  instituted  between  countries  in  as  nearly  as  possible 
the  same  conditions.  The  conditions  prevailing  in  countries 
on  the  continent  of  Europe  are  much  more  nearly  like  those  in 
England  than  are  our  conditions  in  America. 

The  wages  in  protected  France,  Germany,  Italy  and  Aus- 
tria are  considerably  lower  than  the  wages  in  Free  Trade 
England.  How  can  we  reconcile  these  facts  with  the  theory 
that  protection  keeps  up  wages?  At  the  very  least  it  is  clear 
that  other  things  enter  into  the  price  of  labor. 

Here  is  another  question.  If  it  be  true  that  a  country 
paying  high  wages  cannot  con] pete  with  a  country  paying 
low  wages,  how  is  it  that  England  trades  with  all  the  world 
and  of  necessity  competes  with  all  the  world,  although  all  the 
world  except  one  country  pays  lower  wages  than  England? 

There  is  a  notable  source  of  error  in  the  prevailing  protec- 
tion methods  of  estimating  wages.  The  custom  of  the  protec- 
tionist has  been  to  state  the  wages  of  America  and  England  at 
certain  figures  for  certain  occupations.  But,  as  has  already 
been  said,  wages  in  different  sections  of  this  country  vary  ex, 
ceeclingly,  for  instance  the  wages  of  prime  farm  hands  were  a,  few 


26  The  Tariff. 


years  ago,  and  doubtless  are  still,  from  two  hundred  (200) 
to  three  hundred  (300)  per  cent,  higher  in  California  than 
they  were  in  Southern  Misssissippi.  The  wages  paid  in 
California  are,  I  am  informed  by  woolen  goods  makers  30  per 
cent,  higher  than  those  paid  in  Massachusetts,  and  in  California 
more  continuous  .work  is  given,  owing  partly  to  the  climate? 
which  makes  the  difference  still  greater  in  favor  of  the  Califor- 
nia worker.  The  same  difference  in  wages  doubtless  holds 
good  in  nearly  every  business  in  California.  Even  in  Califor- 
nia, wages  vary  in  different  parts  of  the  state,  the  highest  being 
paid  in  Southern  California  where  a  wonderful  development  is 
going  on.  How  can  the  protectionist  reconcile  the  prosperity 
of  California,  a  high  wage  state,  while  dealing  in  unrestricted 
freedom  with  the  low  wage  states  of  the  South  and  East? 

The  wages  in  this  state  are  higher  than  the  mere  state- 
ment of  the  amounts  paid  to  the  worker  would  indicate.  The 
climate  here  makes  housing  or  shelter  and  clothing  less  expen- 
sive, while  offering  opportunity  for  more  work. 

The  wages  in  different  parts  of  England  also  vary,  but  to  a 
less  extent.  Another  source  of  error  has  been  that  the  price 
of  a  day's  work  has  been  taken  without  any  corresponding  in- 
vestigation as  to  how  many  days  in  a  year  the  laborer  has 
work. 

The  methods  of  combinations,  trusts  and  monopolies,  such 
as  running  mills  and  works  on  half  time  or  shutting  down  for 
considerable  periods  etc.  etc.,  makes  such  a  supplemental  in- 
quiry of  absolute  necessity  if  we  would  learn  the  true  earning 
capacity  of  laborers. 

As  a  matter  of  truth  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  wages  in 
the  Eastern  and  Central  states  are  higher  to-day  than  they  are 
in  England.  Sir.  Richard  Temple,  an  authority  on  economic 
subjects  states,  as  quoted  by  Wells,  the  earning  capacity,  per 
capita,  in  different  countries  as  follows  : 

1st.     Australia £41 .4s. 

2d.     England £35.4s. 

3d.     United  States ; £27.4s. 

4th.     Canada £26.18s. 

5th.     Continent  of  Europe  average £18.  Is. 

Australia  comes  according  to  this  authority  first  in  the 
list.  It  is  an  island  divided  in  its  government  between  several 
semi-independent  powers,  some  of  which  as  Victoria,  where 


Protection  rs.  Free  Trade.  '1~ 

Melbourne  is,  have  a  protective  system,  and  others  like  New 
South  Wales  where  Sydney  is,  have  a  free  trade  system  or  one 
approximating  to  it.  Thus  we  see  the  difficulty  of  attributing 
to  any  one  cause  some  favorable  or  unfavorable  condition  we 
may  notice. 

When  we  examine  the  condition  of  the  English  people 
since  the  introduction  of  free  trade  to  that  country  we  find, 
taking  one  year  with  another,  a"  great  increase  in  general  pros- 
perity and  an  increase  of  population  through  indigenous  means 
of  30  per  cent,  in  an  already  densely  peopled  country. 

The  curious  thing  about  it  is  that  the  manual  labor  classes 
have  profited  the  most  by  their  countries  prosperity,  and  the  only 
classes  who  have  suffered  have  been  the  monopolist  land  hold- 
ers, heriditary  nobles  and  their  tenants  etc.  Even  these  have 
only  suffered  recemly  and  doubtless  the  tenants  troubles  will 
deliver  them  from  the  present  land  system  and  give  them  a 
chance  for  an  independence  and  prosperity  they  have  never 
yet  enjoyed. 

Mr.  David  A.  Wells  gives  some  figures  on  the  compara- 
tive condition  of  the  English  people  in  184o  and  in  188G  etc. 
Free  trade  was  adopted  in  1848.  His  statements  are  as  fol- 
lows: 

Crime  and  pauperism  have  diminished  in  England. 

The  income  of  the  capitalist  class  increased  from 
$950,000,000  to  2,000,000,000  or  100  per  cent.  But  at  the  same 
time  the  number  of  the  capitalist  class  increased  so  rapidly 
that  the  increase  of  capital  to  each  individual  of  the  class  was 
^nly  15  per  cent.  The  income  of  the  upper  and  middle  classes 
from  working  increased  from  $770,000,000  to  $1,600,000,000 
or  about  100  per  cent.  The  increase  of  the  manual  labor  classes 
income  has  increased  from  $855,000,000  to  $2,750,000,000  or  over 
200  per  cent.  ''Between  1877  and  1886  the  number  of  assess- 
ments for  incomes  between  $750  and  $5,000  increased  19.26  per 
cent,  while  the  number  of  assessments  for  incomes  of  $5,000 
-and  upward  decreased  2.4  per  cent." 

"In  1840  one  person  in  every  500  in  the  British  Islands 
was  a,  convict;  in  1885  the  proportion  was  as  one  to  every  4,100- 

These  figures,  as  far  as  they  are  correct,  show  a  great  ad- 
vance in  the  material  welfare  of  the  laboring  classes  in  Eng- 
land since  the  adoption  of  free  trade. 


28  The  Tariff. 


The  wages  of  working  men  in  America  have  also  increased 
during  this  period,  taking  it  as  a  whole,  to  a  great  extent,  in 
fact  the  wages  of  labor  have  increased  in  every  part  of  the 
world. 

The  conditions  in  America  and  in  England  are  different,  but 
admitting  them  to  bo  equal,  we  find  the  wages  of  the  two  coun- 
tries, say  from  1850,  to  have  risen  in  about  the  same  proportion  j 
but  the  purchasing  power  of  these  wages  has  not  risen  in  the 
same  proportion.  It  has  risen  in  America  but  risen  still  more 
in  England.  The  last  result  is  clearly  to  be  attributed  to  free 
trade,  and  the  increase  generally  of  the  purchasing  power  of 
wages  is  largely  to  be  attributed  to  the  cheapening  and  quick- 
ening of  transportation  whereby  onerous  natural  tariffs  have 
been  removed.  On  the  other  hand  the  rise  in  wages  in  this 
country  cannot  be  attributed  to  protection  for  the  wages  of 
labor  in  a  free  trade  country,  under  less  favorable  circumstances 
have  also  increased,  and  for  that  matter  wages  increased  very 
rapidly  in  the  Tariff-for-Revenue  period  between  1846  and 
1860  in  this  country,  and  increased  more  rapidly  than  they 
have  for  any  similar  period  since  the  close  of  the  civil  war. 

The  Protectionists  say  that  protection  increases  the  price 
of  foreign  goods  so  that  these  cannot  be  sold  here  so  well  in  com- 
petition with  the  home-made  article.  If  this  be  true,  then  in 
justice,  everyone  ought  to.be  protected  to  the  same  extent  and 
equally.  This  is  not  the  case,  some  are  protected  100  per  cent, 
some  80  per  cent,  some  50  per  cent,  some  35  per  cent,  some  10 
per  cent. and  most  of  the  people,  that  is  to  say  90  per  cent,  of 
them,  are  not  protected  at  all.  The  cost  of  a  system  of  taxa- 
tion, which  has  for  its  purpose  the  giving  of  public  money  to  pri- 
vate persons  for  the  support  of  their  private  business,  must  fall 
on  the  masses.  Such  protective  taxes  are  for  the  few  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  many.  But  we  see  that  the  tax  is  grossly  unjust  and 
inequitable  in  its  working  as  among  the  supposed  beneficiaries 
themselves.  Some  obtain  100  times  more  protection  than 
others  and  some  have  to  pay  more  of  the  protective  tax  to 
members  of  the  protected  class  than  do  others.  For  instance 
the  wool  manufacturer  has  to  pay  a  high  tax  on  his  machinery, 
dyes,  boxes,  and  on  his  material,  wool,  while  the  cotton  manu- 
facturer escapes  taxation  to  a  greatextent  on  his  material, cotton. 
So  the  iron  manufacturer  has  to  pay  the  tax  for  his  iron  and  for 


Protection  rs.  Free  Trade.  29 

his  fuel  from  35  per  cent,  upward,  while  the  jewelry  manufac- 
turer pays  but  10  per  cent,  on  his  diamonds,  etc.  The  amount 
of  protection  given  by  our  tariff  varies  from  the  ten  per  cent, 
received  by  the  prune  grower  to  the  three  hundred  and  twenty 
three  per  cent  given  the  spiritous  liquor  maker.  If  it  be  true 
that  protection  governs  the  price  of  goods  protected  to  the  ex. 
tent  of  the  tax  or  protection  given,  then  is  this  tax  tariff,  as  it 
now  stands,  an  injustice  to  most  of  those  protected  as  well  as  to 
the  masses  who  pay  for  the  larger  part  of  the  cost. 

But  the  protectionist  says  also,  that  protection  does  not  in- 
crease the  price  of  goods  in  proportion  to  the  protection  given 
and  points,  as  a  proof  that  prices  are  not  increased,  to  the  fact 
that  prices  are  tending  downward  in  this  country  and  that  all 
products  are  becoming,  generally  speaking,  cheaper.  If  this  be 
true  then  the  protected  industries  are  deceived,  as  the  first  pro- 
position cannot  be  true  and  the  second  also. 

Prices  of  products  all  over  the  world  have  been  going 
dawn  while  the  price  of  labor  has  been  going  up,  but  the  world 
is  too  large  a  place  for  a  protectionist  to  Idok  at.  His  proposi- 
tion is  to  tax  dollars  out  of  his  fellow  citizens  and  to  put  them 
in  his  own  pocket  under  the  pleasant  plea  that  his  enrichment 
is  for  the  public  good. 

It  does  riot  require  a  very  broad  mental  horizon  to  take  in 
this  idea.  On  the  other  hand  the  fact  that  in  the  long-run  the 
prosperity  of  the  individual  depends  on  the  prosperity  of  his 
neighbors,  and  the  prosperity  of  each  community  depends  on 
the  prosperity  of  the  communities  forming  the  nation,  demands 
a  larger  capacity  to  understand.  Nations  are  political  individ- 
uals and  their  prosperity  as  individuals  depends  on  the  prosper- 
ity of  all  nations.  The  conception  of  humanity  and  its  welfare, 
as  a  part  of  the  welfare  of  the  individual  needs  a  heart  as  wel] 
as  a  brain. 

We  cannot  in  a  large  sense  nor  for  long  periods  of  time, 
profit  by  the  miseries  and  misfortunes  of  others.  It  is  a  ghoul- 
ish and  demon  profit  even  when  it  occurs  and  must  be  at  the 
expense  of  the  wellfare  of  mankind,  while  sound  trade  is  a 
benefit  to  all  concerned  and  can  only  be  carried  on  voluntarily 
as  the  traders  se£  their  profits.  America  would  not  benefit  by 
a  general  massacre  or  famine  or  plague  throughout  the  world. nor 
in  any  portion  of  it  either.  It  is  the  mistake 'of  the  narrow 


30  The  Tariff. 


view  that  a  misfortune  in  one  country,  raising  temporarily  the 
price  of  some  particular  product  in  another,  is  a  benefit.  The 
advantage  to  any  special  class  through  the  misfortunes  of  others 
is  usually  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  effects 
of  the  disaster  in  a  general  way.  A  failure  of  crop  in  one  country 
immediately  diminishes  the  general  consuming  power  of  that 
country.  What  it  took  in  trade  for  its  product  it  can  no  longer 
take.  Thus,  any  country  that  traded  with  it  ^before,  loses  in 
this  general  way,though  some  branch  of  trade  may  benefit.  This 
by  diminishing  its  own  consuming  power,  affects  nations 
trading  with  it,  even  though  these  never  traded  at  all  with  the 
original  sufferer.  It  is  seen  then  that  an  injury  to  one  nation 
is  really,  in  the  end,  an  injury  to  all  nations. 

According  to  protection,  the  advantage  of  one  country  is 
the  injury  of  another,  and  the  injury,  let  us  say  of  the  trade  of 
one  country  by  a  tariff,  is  an  advantage  to  the  other. 

To  rejoice  over  misfortune,  failure  and  bankruptcy  is  in- 
human, but  this  is  the  logical  outcome  of  the  protective  doc- 
trine. 

We  should  aim  to  encourage  the  enterprise  and  self-reli- 
ance of  our  laborers  and  not  to  impair  or  destroy  these  qualities. 

This  last  result  cannot  be  achieved  by  diminishing  the  ex- 
change value  of  the  laborers  wages  on  the  plea  that  such  gov- 
ernment interference  enhances  their  direct  pay.  It  must  be 
done  by  improving  the  condition  of  the  laborer,  by  giving  him 
time  for  thought  and  study  and  by  a  more  practical  education 
in  youth,  to  make  him  more  capable  of  scientific  and  econom- 
ical application  of  his  powers  to  his  employment,  and  doubtless 
by  many  other  means  that 'will  occurr  to  us  when  our  minds 
realize  that  this  is  the  true  direction  by  which  to  end  the  pres- 
ent misery  of  the  many  and  to  give  them  a  clear  road  to  con- 
tinued improvement. 

In  the  old  Political  Economy  of  Wayland  there  is  an  illus- 
tration that  is  simple  and  plain  enough  to  be  understood  by  the 
most  casual  reader. 

Let  us  take   three  supposed  individuals  A  B  and  C 

A  has  a  taste  for  agriculture  and  has  selected  a  home 
where  soil  and  climate  are  most  favorable  to  the  production  of 
wheat.  These  conditions  together  with  his  natural  abilities 
and  taste  for  agriculture  enable  him  to  produce  in  a  year  three 
hundred  bushels  of  the  best  wheat  that  can  be  grown. 

B  has  a  taste  for  making  shoes  and  has  selected  a  home 
especially  favorable  for  this  industry  and  by  devoting  his  entire 
time  to  the  business  can  make  three  hundred  pairs  of  the  best 
shoes  that  can  be  made. 

C  has  a  taste  for  making  coats  and  following  his  bent,  hag 


Protection  vs.  Free  Trade  31 

located  where  his  supplies  are  good  and  cheap  and  where  he 
has  the  best  conditions  for  his  work.  By  devoting  his  time  to 
coat-making  he  can  produce  three  hundred  of  the  best  coats  in 
the  world. 

Now  give  these  three  liberty  and  freedom  and  what  is 
likely  to  be  the  result. 

A  goes  to  B  and  exchanges  100  bushels  of  wheat  for  100 
pairs  of  shoes  and  then  to  C  and  exchanges  100  bushels  of 
wheat  for  100  coats. 

He  has  then  100  bushels  of  the  best  wheat  possible  left  and 
a  hundred  pairs  of  the  best  shoes  and  a  hundred  of  the  best 
coats.  B  has  the  same  and  C  the  same.  One  is  as  well  off  as 
the  other. 

Now  comes  the  protectionist  with  his  chaing-gang  of  tariffs 
and  says  to  A.  You  are  a  fool.  Make  your  own  shoes  and 
coats  and  don't  support  these  outsiders  by  trading  for  their 
products.  You  cannot  continue  this  without  being  ruined. 

A  tariff  is  put  on.  Barriers  are  set  up.  The  freedom  of 
exchange  is  ended. 

A  then  must  make  his  own  coats  and  shoes.  This  re- 
quires time.  He  therefore- can  devote  but  a  third  of  his  time  to 
growing  wheat,  which  we  will  say,  produces  still  100  bushels  of 
the  best  wheat  or  one  third  of  his  former  crop,  but  even  if  he 
had  more  he  would  no  longer  have  a  market  for  it.  One  third 
of  his  time  goes  to  shoes  and  one  third  to  coats  but  neither  his 
talents  nor  his  situation  being  so  favorable  to  these  productions 
as  those  of  B  and  C  he  can  neither  make  so  many  in  the  same 
time  nor  make  them  so  well  as  B  and  C.  Let  us  estimate  that 
he  will  make  fifty  inferior  pairs  of  shoes  and  fifty  inferior  coats 
in  the  time  available. 

At  the  end  of  the  year  he  has  100  bushels  of  the  best 
wheat  and  fifty  inferior  pairs  of  shoes  and  fifty  inferior  coats, 
where  before  he  had  100  pairs  of  the  best  shoes  and  100  of  the 
best  coats  together  with  100  bushels  of  the  best  wheat.  He 
had  also  those  inestimable  boons  of  man,  liberty  and  freedom 
from  all  constraint  not  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  *mo- 
rality  and  order. 

It  makes  no  difference  whether  A  made  his  exchanges  di- 
rect or  by  means  of  money,  the  tool  of  commerce,  through  mid- 
dle men,  for  the  price  he  would  pay  them  for  their  services 
would  be  more  than  compensated  for  by  the  saving  of  his  time 
in  making  the  exchanges. 

Protection  to  the  extent  of  the  barriers  it  sets  up  against 
the  natural  benefits  of  free  exchange  must  operate  in  the  line 
of  this  illustration. 

It  is  perhaps  well  here  to  allude  to  a  matter  of  our  own 
actual  exchanges.  We  take  coffee  from  Brazil  in  large  quan- 
tities but  send  almost  nothing  in  return.  England  sends  goods 


32  The  Tariff. 


to  Brazil  and  pays  for  their  coffee  and  we  pay  England  for  do- 
ing so  in  our  wheat  and  other  exports  to  that  country  in  excess 
of  what  is  required  to  obtain  the  goods  we  take  direct  from 
England.  Thus  our  bills  of  exchange  on  Brazil  all  pass 
through  London.  Under  a  sensible  system  of  Custom  House 
taxation  I  have  no  doubt  but  that  we  could  make  our  ex- 
changes with  Brazil  direct  and  send  them  our  products  for 
theirs. 

Heyl's  "United  States  Import  Duties"  is  the  book  in  which 
can  be  found  the  only  official  compilation  of  our  tariff  outside 
of  the  revised  statutes.  A  study  of  it  will,  I  think,  surprise 
any  one.  Our  tariff  is  a  complicated  affair.  Taking  the  dif- 
ferent articles  under  each  head  it  covers  about  two  thousand 
products  and  taxes  them  in  all  sorts  of  different  ways,  some 
with  specific  duties,  some  with  advalorem  duties  and  some  with 
both.  "Many  of  the  articles,  such  as  tin,  are  not  produced 
here  at  all,  and  others,  such  as  copper,  are  produced  in  such 
quantities  as  to  require  exportation  of  the  surplus,  the  only  ef- 
fect of  the  tariff  being  to  make,  as  has  been  said,  American 
copper  higher  in  America  than  it  is  in  foreign  lands  and  thus  to 
foster  trusts,  monopolies  and  combinations  inimical  to  the 
American  consumer. 

As  a  monument  of  stupidity  and  injustice  there  is  probably 
nothing  extant  that  equals  our  Protective  tariff.  Its  cost  to 
the  American  people  no  one  will  ever  know.  We  have  expos- 
ure after  exposure  to  show  that  its  administration  is  honey- 
combed with  abuse  and  it  requires  but  examination  to  show  the 
inequalities,  injustice  and  complexity  of  its  taxes,  drawbacks 
and  bounties. 

The  statesmen  of  both  the  great  parties  long  ago  com- 
mitted themselves  to  the  necessity  of  a  reform. 

Most  appropriate  is  the  derivation  of  the  word  tariff.  It 
comes  from  Tariffa  a  castle  and  port  formerly  existing  on  the 
Mediterranean  from  which  piratical  ships  sallied  to  levy 
toll  6n  honest  commerce. 

The  taxation  of  the  people  at  large  to  advance  the  interests 
of  a  few  favored  ones  is  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  the  citizen 
in  a  free  country.  No  citizen  should  be  forced  to  pay  for  the 
augmentation  of  a  private  fortune.  The  violation  of  so  plain  a 
principle  of  government  and  the  doing  of  so  gross  an  injustice 
cannot  but  do  harm. 

He  who  sows  the  wind  will  reap  the  whirlwind.  The 
mother  of  riot  and  anarchy  is  injustice.  To  do  wrong  cannot 
be  right,  to  do  right  cannot  be  wrong.  It  is  said  that  free  trade 
is  theoretically  right  but  practically  wrong.  Nothing  can  be 
theoretically  right  and  practically  wrong. 

A  public  tax  for  private  uses  is  robbery  under  the  forms  of 
law. 


Protection  v».  Free  Trade.  33 


DRAWBACK  RATES,   1883. 

Enabling  foreigners  to  buy  certain  American  manufactures  at 
less  than  Americans  themselves  can  buy  them.  It  may  be  no- 
ticed that  bayonets,  fire-arms,  bullets  and  gunpowder  figure 
prominently  in  this  table. 

The  government  gives  certain  firms  special  advantages 
over  all  others  in  this  bounty  system.  Of  these,  Hubbart, 
Blake  &  Co.,  makers  of  scythes.  *The  Colt's,  Peabody,  Win- 
chester and  E.  Remington  &  Son,  fire-arm  manufacturers,  are 
the  most  prominent.  Why  such  favoritism  should  be  shown, 
protectionists,  perhaps,  can  explain. 

AXES,  made  from  iron  and  steel  by  the  process  of  splitting  the  steel  and 
inserting  the  iron,  1  3-10  cents  per  pound.  AXES  alid  HATCHETS, 
made  by  the  process  of  splitting  the  iron  and  inserting  the  steel, 
same  as  duty  paid.  Allow  for  a  quantity  of  iron  equal  to  the  net- 
weight  of  the  exported  articles,  and  a  quantity  of  steel  equal  to  166- 
1000  of  such  net  weight. 

BAGS,  from  jute  and  burlap  cloth,  same  as  duty  paid,  40  per  cent.  Ex- 
ported quantity  determined  by  measurement. 

BAND  and  BAR  IRON,  (see  IRON.) 

BAYONETS,  made  for  Colt's  patent  fire-arm,  7  cents  each;  made  for  the 
Winchester  fire-arm,  1  37-100  cents  each  ;  made  by  E.  Remington  & 
Sons,  from  steel  made  from  imported  iron  paying  ad  valorem  duty, 
2  cents  each  ;  and  from  iron  paying  a  duty  of  one  cent  per  pound, 
1  77-100  cents  each. 

BLACKING  Boxes,  from  tin  plates,  same  as  duty  paid,  45  per  cent.  The 
exported  quantity  determined  by  adding  to  the  outside  measure- 
ment of  the  box  one-fourth  of  such  product. 

BOLTS,  NUTS,  and  PIVOTS,  from  iron,  same  as  duty  paid. 

BULLETS,  leaden,  and  SHOT,  same  as  duty  paid,  2  cents  per  pound. 

CANS,  from  tin  plates,  same  as  duty  paid.  The  exported  quantity  deter- 
mined by  measuring  the  "  blanks"  before  soldering,  or  by  'adding 
one-twentieth  to  the  product  of  the  outside  measurement  of*  the  com- 
pleted cans,  excepting  one-pound  cans,  for  which  add  40  per  cent,  to 
the  outside  measurement.  CANS,  from  tin  plates,  completed,  with 
the  exception  of  soldering  (blanks),  same  as  duty  paid.  The  ex- 
ported quantity  determined  by  a  United  States  weigher. 

CARTRIDGES,  same  as  on  bullets  and  gunpowder  exported  separately. 

CASTOR  OIL,  product  of  castor  seed,  25  cents  per  gallon. 

('  AsioR  POMAC-I:,  product  of  castor  seed,  11  cents  per  100  pounds. 


CHAINS,  from  bar  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.     Add  4  per  cent,  to  exported 

quantity  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture. 
COPPER,  from  ore,  same  as  duty  paid.     COPPER,  from  block  or  blister 

copper,  same  as  duty  paid,  4  cents  per  pound. 
COPE  TUBES,  from  tin  plates,  same  as  duty  paid.    The  exported  quantity 

determined  by  allowing  for  each  tube  a  square  equal  in  length  to 

the  height  of  the  tube,  and  in  width,  to  its  largest  circumference  . 


34  The  Tariff. 


CORDAGE,  from  Manilla  hemp,  \}^  cents  per  pound;  from  jute  hemp,  % 
cent  per  pound  ;  of  Sisal  grass,  %  cent  per  pound ;  from  New  Zea- 
land flax,  8-9  cent  per  pound ;  tarred  Russia,  15-16  cent  per  pound. 

DRESSED  SKINS,  from  raw,  same  as  duty  paid. 

FISH  PLATES,  from  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.  Add  12  per  cent,  to  export- 
ed weight  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture. 

FLOUR,  from  wheat  which  paid  a  duty  of  20  cents  per  bushel,  75  cents 
per  barrel. 

GLAZIERS'  POINTS,  product  of  sheet  zinc,  same  as  duty  paid. 

GUNPOWDER,  from  saltpetre  which  paid  a  duty  of  2  cents  per  pound : 
American  Sporting  1  08-100  cents  per  pound ;  U.  S.  Government,  1 
60-100  cents  per  pound;  Shipping  and  Mining,  1  4-10  cents  per 
pound. 

GUNPOWDER,  from  saltpetre  which  paid  a  duty  of  1'cent  per  pound :  Ameri- 
can Sporting,  8r10  cent  per  pound  ;  II.  S.  Government,  8-10  cent  per 
pound;  Shipping  and  Mining,  7-10  cent  per  pound. 

GUNS,  Gatling,  42  calibre  and  10  barrels,  $7.03  each  gun ;  42  calibre  and 
6  barrels,  $5.00  each  gun.  65-75  calibre  and  10  barrels,  $9.00  each 
gun;  1  inch  calibre  and  10  barrels,  $11.73  each  gun. 

GUN-SYSTEMS,  made  for  Colt's  patent  fire-arms  14  42-100  cents  each. 

GUN-SYSTEMS,  inade  byE.  Remington  &  Sons,  from  iron  and  steel:  For 
the  iron,  5  4-100  cents  each  ;  for  the  steel,  when  imported  as  such, 
3%  cents  each ;  for  the  steel,  made  from  imported  iron,  1  31-100  cents 
each. 

GUN-SYSTEMS,  made  for  the  Peabody  fire-arm,  7  29-100  cents  each. 

GUN  TRIMMINGS,  made  for  Colt's  patent  fire-arm,  6  6-10  cents  each  arm. 

GUN  TRIMMINGS,  made  by  E.  Remington  &  Sons :  For  the  iron,  1  54-100 
cents  each  gun ;  for  the  steel,  when  imported  as  such,  %  cent  each 
gun ;  for  the  steel,  made  from  imported  iron,  ^  cent  each  gun. 

GUN  TRIMMINGS,  made  for  the  Peabody  fire-arm,  1  74-100  cents  each  arm. 

GUN  TRIMMINGS  and  SYSTEMS,  for  the  Winchester  fire-arm,  8}t>  cents  each 
arm. 

GUN  TRIMMINGS  and  SYSTEMS,  made  for  the  Martini  Henry  rifle,  same  as 
duty  paid.  The  quantity  of  material  used  in  the  manufacture  shall 
be  determined  by  allowing  for  each  receiver,  3  66-100  pounds  steel ; 
for  each  block,  1  'pound  iron ;  for  each  guard,  1  pound  iron ;  for  each 
lever,  8-10  pound  iron  ;  for  each  set  of  bands,  45-100  pound  iron  ;  for 
each  light  base,  %  pound  iron ;  for  each  butt  plate,  %  pound  iron  ; 
for  each  bayonet,  1  84-100  pounds  iron. 

HANDLES  and  NOZZLES,  made  from  sheet  zinc  and  attached  to  tin  cans 
(when  tagger's  tin  is  also  used  in  making  such  nozzles),  27  cents  per 
100  cans ;  when  tagger's  tin  is  not  used,  25  cents  per  100  cans. 

HANDLES,  made  from  sheet  zinc,  and  attached  to  tin  cans,  without  above- 
described  nozzles,  16  cents  per  100  cans. 

HATCHETS,  (see  AXES  and  HATCHETS.) 

HOOP  IRON  and  HORSESHOE  IRON,  (see  IRON. ) 
HUNGARIAN  NAILS,  same  as  tacks. 

IRON,  band,  bar,  horseshoe,  hoop,  railroad,  rod,  scroll.  Wholly  from 
imported  scrap  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.  To  cover  wastage  in  manu- 
facture, add  25  per  cent,  to  exported  weight  when  exclusively  old 
scrap  iron  wras  used,  and  12  per  cent,  only  if  part  of  the  material  was 
new  scrap  iron. 

LANTERNS,  from  tin  plates,  same  as  duty  paid.  Quantity  determined  by 
the  measurement  of  the  pieces  composing  such  lanterns  before  they 
are  put  together. 


Protection,  vs.  Free  Trade.  35 


LEAD  PIPE,  same  as  duty  paid. 

LEATHER,  sole,  from  hides,  same  as  duty  paid. 

LINSEED  OIL,  <il4  cents  per  gallon. 

LOCOMOTIVE  TIES,  from  imported  steel,  same  as  duty  paid.  Add  2  per 
cent,  to  exported  weight  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture. 

NAILS,  cut,  from  sheet  and  plate  iron,  1%  cents  per  pound ;  horseshoe, 
from  slit  iron  rods,  same  as  duty  paid;  Hungarian,  same  as  tacks; 
cut,  from  scrap  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.  To  cover  wastage  in  manu- 
facture, add  25  per  cent,  to  exported  weight  when  exclusively  old 
scrap  iron  was  used,  and  12  per  cent,  only  if  part  of  the  material  was 
new  scrap  iron. 

NAIL  RODS,  rolled  from  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.  Add  9  per  cent,  to  the 
exported  weight  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture ;  slit,  from  iron, 
same  as  duty  paid.  Add  3  per  cent,  to  exported  weight  to  cover 
wastage. 

NEW  ENGLAND  RUM,  (see  RUM.) 

NO/ZLES,  made  from  tin  plates,  same  as  duty  paid ;  flat  screw  tops,  from 
sheet  zinc,  attached  to  tin  cans,  9  cents  per  100  cans. 

OIL,  (see  LINSEED  and  CASTOR.) 

PACKING,  from  jute  yarn,  same  as  duty  paid. 

PLATES,  tack,  same  as  duty  paid. 

PLATES,  fish  and  robe,  (see  FISH  PLATES,  and  ROBE  PLATES.) 

PIPE,  lead,  (see  LEAD.) 

PISTOLS,  Colt's  navy  or  belt,  11  64-100  cents  each. 

PIVOTS,  (see  BOLTS.) 

POMACE,  (see  CASTOR.) 

RAILROAD  IRON,  (see  IRON  . ) 

RICE,  cleaned  from  paddy  rice,  1  2-5  cents  per  pound ;  cleaned  from  rough 
rice,  2  1-5  cents  per  pound. 

RIFLES,  (see  GUN  SYSTEMS  and  TRIMMINGS.) 

RIFLE  BARRELS,  from  bar  steel  and  from  barrel  moulds,  same  as  duty 
paid. 

ROBE  PLATES,  from  goat  skins,  same  as  duty  paid.  The  number  of  skins 
used  determined  by  inspection  of  the  exported  plates.- 

ROD  IRON,  (see  IRON.) 

RUM,  New  England,  6  5-16  cents  per  gallon. 

SALT,  fine,  8  cents  per  100  pounds. 

SALTPETRE,  refined  from  crude,  95-100  cent  per  pound. 

SCREWS,  wood,  (see  WOOD  SCREWS.) 

SCROLL  IRON,  (see  IRON.) 

SCYTHES,  manufactured  by  Hubbart,  Blake  &  Co.,  of  West  Waterville, 
Maine:  Light  grass,  45  cents  per  dozen;  heavy  St.  John,  65%  cents 
per  dozen  ;  grain  83%  cents  per  dozen. 

SHANKS,  from  steel,  same  as  duty  paid. 

SHEET  LEAD,  from  pig  lead,  same  as  duty  paid. 

SHOCKS,  from  staves,  same  as  duty  paid. 

SHOT,  (see  BULLETS.) 

SHOVELS  and  SPADES,  chiefly  of  steel,  80  cts.  per  doz. ;  chiefly  of  iron  50 
cts.  per  doz. 

SKINS,  dressed,    (see  DRESSED  SKINS.) 

SOLDER,  used  in  making  tin  cans,  16  cents  per  100  cans  of  5  gallons  ca- 
pacity, and  in  proportion  for  cans  of  less  capacity. 

SOLE  LEATHER,  (see  LEATHER.) 


36  The  Tariff. 


SUGAR,  refined  from  raw  sugar :  Loaf ,  cut-loaf,  crushed,  granulated,  and 
powdered,  dried,  3 18-100  cents  per  pound ;  white  coffee  sugar,  undried, 
and  above  No.  20,  Dutch  standard  in  color,  2  58-1 00  cents  per  pound; 
all  grades  of  coffee  sugar,  No.  20,  Dutch  standard,  and  below  in  col- 
or, 2  8-100  cents  per  pound. 

SUGAR,  refined  from  melado,  on  which  a  duty  was  paid  of  1%  cents  per 
pound,  and  25  per  cent,  in  addition  thereto,  same  as  sugar  refined 
from  raw  sugar;  refined  from  molasses,  1J£  cents  per  pound. 
SYRUP,  from  sugar,  6%  cents  per  gallon ;  from  melado,  on  which  a  duty 
was  paid  of  1}^  cents  per  pound,  and  25  per  cent,  in  addition  there- 
to, 5^8  cents  per  gallon ;  from  molasses,  5  cents  per  gallon . 
TACKS,  from  bar  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.     Add  14  per  cent,  to  exported 

quantity  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture. 
TIN  CANS,  (see  CANS.) 

WIRE,  telegraph,  from  iron  rods,  same  as  duty  paid ;  from  steel  for  bridg- 
es, same  as  duty  paid.  • 
WIRK,  finer  than  telegraph  wire,  from  iron  bars  and  rods,  same  as  duty 

paid. 
WIRE,  manufactured  by  the  American  Screw  Company  of  Providence, 

R.  I.,  same  as  duty  paid. 

WOOD  SCREWS,  from  iron,  same  as  duty  paid.  Add  50  per  cent,  to  ex- 
ported weight  to  cover  wastage  in  manufacture. 

In  those  cases  where  a  discriminating  duty  has  been  paid  under  the 
provisions  of  Section  2501  of  the  Revised  Statutes,  the  drawback  allow- 
ed shall  bear  the  same  relation  to  that  duty  as  the  usual  allowance  bears 
to  the  ordinary  duty.  All  of  the  foregoing,  except  the  drawback  on  re- 
fined sugars,  shall  be  subject  to  the -usual  10  per  cent,  retention. 

The  drawback  on  refined  sugars  shall  be  subject  to  a  retention  of  1 
per  cent.,  as  required  by  Section  3,  of  the  Act  of  March  3,  1875. 

On  the  exportation  of  syrup  resulting  from  the  refining  of  imported 
molasses,  upon  which  the  duty  of  four  cents  per  gallon,  prescribed  by 
the  tariff  of  March  3,  1883,  has  been  paid,  a  drawback  will  be  allowed 
at  the  rate  of  three  and  two-tenths  (3  2-10)  cents  per  gallon,  less  the  le- 
gal retention  of  ten  per  centum.  (S.  S.,  5750.) 

Such  of  the  rates  of  drawback  prescribed  under  the  old  tariff'  as  are 
specific,  and  relate  to  articles  manufactured  from  materials  upon  which 
the  duty  is  changed  by  the  new  tariff,  are  hereby  revoked.  Exporta- 
tions  of  articles  which  were  subject  to  rates  of  the  above  description  will, 
therefore,  be  reported  to  the  Department  in  accordance  with  the  provis- 
ions of  Article  828  of  the  General  Regulations  for  the  establishment  of 
new  rates.  (Treasury  Circular,  July  7>  1883.) 


DUTIES  COLLECTED  IN  1883. 

All  articles  paying  a  duty  aggregating  less  than  $100,000  are  omitted. 
It  must  be  remembered  that 'the  table  only  give  the  duties  collected  by 
the  Government. 

The  enormous  aggregate  -of  duties  collected  by  private  protected 
persons  or  by  corporations  is  unknown  and  cannot  be  tabulated. 

Table  showing  Quantities,  Values,  Total  Duties,  Rate  of  Duty  and  average  Duty 
ad  valorem,  on  all  Imported  Commodities  paying  $100,000  or  upwards  into 

the  Treasury  in  the  year  ending  June  30, 1883. 
^[Compiled  from  the  official  report  on  Commerce  and  Navigation  of  the  U.S.  for  1883. 


DTTIAKLE  ARTICLES. 

Quantities 

Values       Rj£ft°f 

Duties. 

Duty 
Ad- 
val. 

!  Dollars. 

Dollars. 

^  ct. 

Animals,  living  

4.030,822  20  per  ct 

TS06.164 

Beer.  Ale,  Porter,  in  bottles   galls. 

901,215        801,906  35c.  %  gal. 

315,425 

39   33 

"          otherwise.          galls.           979,787 

344,891  20c  .  "f.  gal  . 

195,957 

56  .  S  J 

Hooks,  Engravings  and  printed  matter   

2,982,221;  25  per  ct. 

745,556 

25 

Braids.  Plaits,  Laces,  Trimmings,  etc 

2.2'J7.'.!62  30  per  ct. 

689,389 

;-;Q 

Brass,  Manufactures  of  

570,666  35  per  ct. 

182.664 

35 

BRKADSTI-FF.-:  etc.— 

Baric  v    

9,944,066 

7,573,443  I5c  %>.  hush 

1.191.61(1     19  70 

Barley.  Malt                

1.355,112 

1,124,331  20  per  ct. 

224,  S66    20 

Peas,  'Beans,  etc  bush.           700,876 

1,112,638  10  per  ct. 

111,264    10 

Rice,  cleaned.     .            Ibs. 

63,909,474 

1,391,742  2Kc.  ^  ft. 

1.597.737  114.86 

Bristles  Ibs.            983,907 

1,193,707  15c.  "ft  ft. 

147,586 

12.36 

Brushes                                                      i     

434,706  1  40  per  ct. 

173,882    40 

Buttons  '  

3,771,331  30  per  ct. 

1,131,399    30 

Cement,  Roman                                  bbls^          456,418 

802,294  20  per  ct. 

160,459 

20 

CHEMICALS,  Dunis.  Etc. 

Aniline  Dves               ..                      Ibn        1,004,701 

1,195,837    <50c.  ^  ft 

920,874    77.01 

r;ivi-crinc...                                       ..;H»        6.780,217     1,017,772  30  per  ct. 

305,332    30 

Opium  229,011        747,794  $1  per  ft. 

2'J.t.Oll     30.62 

Medicinal  preparations,  not  otherwise 

provided  for  284,356  10  per  ct. 

113,74:;    tn 

npium  prepared  for  smoking  298,153     2.*>84,589  $6  per  ft. 

1.7SS.917    66  64 

Nitrate  of  Saltpetre,  crude  Jbs       10,534,081        382,589  Ic.      " 

105.341     27.5;; 

Soda,  Caustic                               Ibs       -Vj.172.49d     1,134,265  ll-^c.  " 

782,5X7    69 

Sod  a  A  sh  Ibs     323.726,726     4,006,638  '  .tc.     " 

809,317    20 

Total  Chemicals,  etc  

16,134,204     

ii.053.574    37  52 

clay,  Fuller's  Earth,  etc.  tons  

204,742  $5  per  ton. 

107,310    52.41 

Clocks  and  ]4arts  of  

443,953:35  per  ct. 

155,384 

35 

Wntches    

2,347,311  25 

5S6.X53    25 

Coal,  Bituminous     tons 
Corsets  and  Corset    Cloths.     

645,924 

2,013,555  [75c.  per  ton 
589,473  35  per  ct. 

484,443 
206,315 

24.05 
35 

COTTON,  MANUFACTURES  OF— 

Cotton,  bleached  yds. 

9,776,320 

1,  101,509  5Mc.  per  yd 

537,698 

48.81 

Cotton,  colored  yds. 

3,778,286 

1,041,576,  \lyzc.  " 

£58,882 

53.48 

\  &  20  *j$  Ct. 

Cotton,  Jeans,  Denims,  etc.,  colored 

<6l^c.^yd 

under  200  threads  to  the  sqr  in.  .yds. 
Cotton  Goods  not  in  foregoing  sch'le. 

4,629,056 
4,841,664 

734,939    j*15^ct. 
1,016,199      7^c.^yd 

411,129 
355,670 

55.94 
35 

U  15$ct. 

Cotton  Hosiery  

8,5o5,769  35  per  ct. 

2.994,519 

35 

Cotton  Laces,  Braids,  etc. 

6.392,258  35        " 

2,237.290 

35 

cotton  Ready-Made  clothing   

Cotton  Thread,  Yarn,  etc.,  40  to  60 

<20c.    f».  11) 

cts,  per  pound                        .  .     .  .  Ibs 

257,655    (1  ,t  20$  ct. 

p.5.900    60  18 

cation  Thread,  Yarn,  etc.  60  to  80  cts. 

C3IV.  -|^-   p, 

per  pound                          Ibs 

308,716 

224,302    /*  -JO  -f  ct. 

137,475    61.20 

Cotton  Thread.    Yarn.    etc..  over  80 

\  (Of    "t^,     |}| 

els    per  pound                                 His 

856,600 

1.014,705      4k20'«  ct. 

5)5.5X1    :'3  77 

Cotton  Velvet,  Velveteens,  etc.   ....                            1.799.761  35  per  ct. 

629,916    35 

Lotion.  Manufactures  of,  not  other- 

wise provided   for.              9.029,782  35  per  ct. 

3,160,424    35 

Total  Cotton  Manufactures  j   32,359,344  

12.  2:.  1.371     -.7    -1 

Diamonds,  Gems,  etc.  

7,598,175,10  per  ct. 

759,818:  10 

Earrhenware,  plain  and  white  

368,943  45  per  ct. 

166,023 

45 

Earthenware,  decorated 

2.587.545  50  per  ct. 

1,293,772 

50 

Earthenware.  other.uot  otherwise  prov    5,685.700  40  per  ct. 

2,274,283 

40 

Total  Earthenware  and  Chins 

8,693,273 

3,746.489    43  10 

Embroideries.  ''otton.  Linen  JBilk,  etc  

4  ,929,445  35  per  ct. 

1,725,30' 

FA  N  c  Y  A  RTI  r  LE  s— 

c      . 

V—     »/        £      , 

Beads  and  Bead  Ornaments                                            730.649  50  per  ct. 

"":;65.:'.-M.  50 

Dolls  

794,269  35  per  ct, 

277,9'" 

Fans  

381,09835  per  ct.     ' 

133,384    3o 

DUTIABLE  ARTICLES. 

Quantities. 

Values. 

Rate  of 
Duty. 

Duties. 

Duty 
Ad 
val. 

Feathers,  Ornamental,  Ostrich,  etc., 
crude  
Feathers,  dressed  colored,  etc.  
Feathers  and  Flowers,  artificial  
Perfumery,  Cologne  galls. 
Perfumery,  other,  not  otherwise  pro- 
vided for  
Pipes,  not  otherwise  prov.  for,  .gross 

Toys,  wooden  and  other  
Total  Fancy  Articles  
Fire  Crackers  boxes 
Sardines  boxes 
FISH,  Total  
FLAX  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF— 
Brown  Linen,  under  30c.  yard  
Brown  Linen,  above  30c.  sqr.  yard.  . 
Handkerchiefs  under  30c,  yd  
Handkerchiefs,  above  80c.  sqr.  yard. 
Burlaps,  etc  
Thread  Lace  and  Insertings 

10,226 
12,li4 

264,606 
6,250,832 

Dollars. 

3,286,162 
299,434 
813,695 
212,416 

230,133 
136,575 

554,019 

25  per  ct. 

50       " 
50       " 
$?3  '#  gal 
I  A  50  '$  ct. 
50  per  ct. 
1  11.50  r#  KB 
U75^ct. 
50  per  ct. 

fi  per  box. 
4c. 

35  per  ct. 
40 
35       " 
10       " 
30        " 
30 
40       " 

40  per  ct. 

10  per  ct 
Ic.  per  Ib 
2J*      " 
20  per  ct 
20      " 
20      " 
6c.  per  Ib 
lOc  per  Ib 
3c.      " 

1C.         " 

Ic.      " 

2^C.   " 

20  to  35  pr  c 

40  per  ct 
(25c.  per 
j  sqr  foot 
50c.  sqr  ft 

lOc.       " 
l^c.  per  Ib 
2c.      " 
2^C.    " 
3C. 

10  per  ct 

25a40per  ct 
I0a40      " 
10 

$20  per  ton 
$15        " 
$6 
*15 
40  per  ct 
25 

8c.  per  Ib 

l^c.     " 
35  per  ct 

l^c.  per  Ib 

Ic.  per  Ib 
20  per  ct 
$7  per  ton 
70c.  per  100 

Dollars. 

821,540 

14!),  717 
406,849 
136,887 

115,067 
120,002 

277,009 

~#ct. 

25 
50 
50 
64.44 

50 

88.30 

50 
3H  43 
126.07 
35.20 
21.27 

35 

40 
35 
40 
80 
30 
40 

40 
32-.  85 

10. 
24.99 

27.32 
20. 
20. 
20. 
5fi.  91 
56.66 
44.98 

35: 

10.50 
36.82 
25.35 
21.99 

7,908,102 
209,894 
710,311 
1,474,954 

10,924,648 
2,280,129 
488,309 
585,67-2 
4,391,675 
1,012,759 
723,654 

814,614 
22^088^891 

1,331,998 
1,247,504 

489,10? 
531,462 
2,555,787 
3,010,662 
381,632 
220,291 
527,851 
555,388 
2,763,067 
3,495,591 

3,U39,082 
264,606 
250,033 
357,979 

3,823,627 
912,052 
170,908 
234,269 
1,317,502 
3015,828 
298,461 

325,846 
7,584,343 

133,200 
311,712 
138,683 

106,280 
511.157 

602,132 
217.480 
124,815 
237,454 
194,386 
511,107 
1,287,185 

Thread  and  Twine  
Other  FJax  Manufactures,  not  other- 
wise provided  for  
Total  Flax  and  Manufactures  of. 
FRUITS  AND  NUTS— 
Bananas 

Currants...                                   ...Ibe 
Figs  Ibg 
Grapes  and  Grape  Juice  
Lemons  
Oranges  
Almonds,  not  shelled  Ibs 
Almonds,  shelled  Ibe 
Filberts  and  Walnuts  Ibs 
Sweetmeats,  etc.,  not  otherwise  prov. 
Prunes  Ibs 

31,171,171 
5,345,324 

S',624',6es 
1,248,150 
7,915,135 

51,110^ 
51,487,389 

Raisins  Ibs 
Total  Fruits  and  Nnts. 

18,157,687 
5,142,022 

'  1,017^628 

339,171 
600,032 

737,874 
312,63? 
882.34f 
407,  805 
479,691 

1,927,53? 

4,603,455 
1,130,575 

287,323 
*    407,471 

213,1  =>2 

738,688 

220,937 
182,128 
268,786 
326,246 
360,512 

771,016 

Furs  and  Manufactures  of. 

GJ,ASS  AND  MANUFACTURES  — 

9,577,437 

Porcelain,  Bohemian  cut,  etc  
Plate  Glass,  24x30  to  60  inches,  not 
silvered  sq.  feet 
Plate  Glass,  above  24x^0  in  ...  sq.  feet 
Plate  Glass  from  16x24  to  24x30  inches 
silvered  sq.  feet 
Window  Glass,  under  10x15  in  Ibg 
Window  Glass,from  10x15  to  16x24  Ibs 
Window  Glass,  from  16x24  to  24x30  Ibs 
Window  Glass  above  24x30  Ibs 
Manufactures  of  Glass,not  otherwise 
provided  for  
Total  Glass  and  Manufactures  of 
Gold  and  Silver,  Manufactures  of  
Hair  and  Manufactures  of  
Hats  and  Bonnets,  straw  
HEMP,  JUTE  AND  FIBRE— 
Manilla,  not  otherwise  prov.  for-tone 
Jute  and  Sunn  tons 
Jute  Butts  tons 
Sisal  Grass,  <fec  tons 
Bags  and  Baggingnot  otherwise  prov. 
Jute  Yarn  pounds 
Total  Hemp  and  Manufactures  of 
Hops  Ibs 
IKON  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF— 
Band,hoop  andscroll,under%in  thick 
Cotton  ties  Ibs 
Bar,  rolled  or   hammered,  smaller 
sizes.                          .                    Ibs 

40. 

ti'2  M 
123.11 

29.94 
58.26 
70.30 

80. 
77.0:; 

-10. 

55.05 

:-;:-;.  4  s 
21.26 
40. 

14.17 

24  ** 
18.71 
14.15 
40. 
25. 
2C.34 
10.62 

88.04 

00. 

57.72 

50.26 
20. 
44. 
51.92 

852,607 
1,477,37' 

2,209,371 
12,141,85*- 
13,439,10? 
13  049,85f/ 
12,317,077 

7,597,897 
339,671 
1,021,323 
750,027 

4,656,840 
577,831 
2,092,186 
1,978,804 
1,786,036 
698,836 

4,182,616 
113,708 

217,140 
300,011 

660,018 
143,787 

391,349 
279,949 
714,414 
171,709 

26,401 
9,58( 
65,22£ 
18,66? 

12,230,98C 

1,977,715 

9,903,51? 
49,746,80f 

8,120,088 

88,724,974 
609,322 
432,3*3 
37,076,985 

12,615,»a» 
1,490,026 

168,726 
822,773 

210,979 

1,765,355 
1,587,597 
7,789,840 
472,601 

lV»<v>,5C6 
158,217 

148,553 
287,971 

121,801 

887,250 
317,519 
3,026,470 
259,539 

Bar,  rolled  or  hammered,  larger 
sizes  Ibs 
Ore  tons 
Pig  Iron  tons 
Railroad  Bars  Ibs 

DUTIABLE    ARTICLES, 

Quantities. 

Values. 

Rate  of 
Duty. 

Duties. 

Duty 
Ad 
Val. 

Rolled  or  hammered,  not  otherwise 
provided  for  Ibs 
Strap,  wrought  tone 
Sheet  1  roil,  over  No.20,wire  guage,lbs 
Manufactures  of  Iron,  not  otherwise 
provided  for  
Total  Iron  and  Manufacture  of..  . 
STEEL  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF— 
Blooms                                                Ibs 

39,664,719 
76,126 
10,742,365 

147,679,483 

15,101^992 

8,838,148 

154,982,363 
412,225,655 
154,322,347 

Dollars. 

927,738 
1,399,806 
241,895 

3,393,827 

l}4c.  per  Ib 
$8  per  ton 
l^c.  per  Ib 

35  per  ct 

45  per  ct 
50        " 
35 
2J4c.  per  Ib 
ic. 
35  per  ct 
25        " 
P>%c.  per  Ib 
30  per  ct 
»'     " 
i  per  ct 

1  5  per  ct 

25  per  ct 
50 
10 
20        " 

35 

jSOciciibft 
(  &  50  pr  ct 
20a45  per  ct 
10a40  per  ct 
30 
$1  per  gal 
10  per  ct 

10a35  per  ct 
35 
15c.  per  bus 
12c.  per  100 
Sc.  per  100 
20c.perbus 
20  per  ct 

60       " 
80       " 
60        " 
60        " 
60        " 
60        " 
50        " 
60 

50        " 
60 

jie.prlb* 
/  25a30  pr  c 
lOc.  per  Ib 
20c.       " 
5c. 

$2  per  gal 
|2  per  gal 
$2  per  gal 
$2  per  gal 
$3  per  doz 
$6  per  doz 
40c.  per  gal 
$1.60  pr  doz 

(5c.  pr  gal 
(  <t  25  pr  c 
4c.  per  gal 

Dollars. 

495,809 
609,011 
134,279 

1,187,839 

FcF. 

53.44 
43.51 

55.51 

35. 
40.37 

4."). 

:>o  . 
35. 
48.21 
30.58 
;;.->. 
25. 
82.  S5 
30. 
30. 
4f>. 

40.87 

25 
58.86 

25. 
50, 
10. 
20. 

;;.-,  . 

29  80 

<;;;  :>i 

29.72 
28.46 
30. 
fiG  .  1:1 

10. 

32.88 

:j4  t;;? 

I!;")  . 
32.38 
36.60 
73;  25 

18.49 
20. 

60. 
60. 
60. 
60. 
60- 
GO. 
50. 
60. 

50. 
60. 
59  01 
44  99 

118.94 
36.94 

4S  ',.[ 
51.05 

83.25 

127.04 
302.39 
322.94 
47.ir> 
48.98 
63. 
28.69 
69.45 

24.01 
17.  SI 

20,305,844 

1,687,080 
1,245,853 
860,954 
704,814 
867,685 
1,336,32'! 
421,204 
2,335,615 
7,691,52* 
1,416,850 
1,261,608 

8,198,389 

7">9,1SP, 
622,92(, 

:»i,:m 
839,793 

265,144 
467,714 
105,301 
1,937,279 

425,05;-, 
2,292,4^9 

5(17,721 

Cutlery,  knives  
Cutlery,  all  other  
Ingots,  bars,  &c.,under7c  per  Ib.  .Ibs 
luirots,  7  to  lie  per  Ib  Ibs 
Fire-arms    
Needles,  not  otherwise  prov.  for  
Railway  bars,  steel.  Ibs 
•SU-el  wire  rods  Ibs 
Steel,  not  otherwise  provided  for..  Ibs 
Manufactures  of,    "      "        "     
Total  steel  and  Manufactures  of 
Jewelry,  not  otherwise  provided  for.. 
Lead,  and  Manufactures  of  
LEATHER  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF— 
Calfskins,  tanned  
Cloves  and  Mitts  
Morocco  skins  
Upper  leather  and  skins,  u.  o.  p.   for 
Manufactures  of,  not  otherwise  p.  for 
Total  leather  and  Manufactures  of 
Marble  

Mats  and  Matting  
Metals,  not  otherwise  pi*ovided  for.  .  .  . 
Musical  Instruments  and  strings  .  . 
Olive  oil  gall 
Paintings  and  Statuary 

20,531,532 
692,97?. 
170,198 

2,150,732 
4,040,095 
2,019,850 
3,518,438 
756,472 

8,392,115 
148,244 
100,172 

537,688 
2,020,047 
201,98.-] 
709,687 
264,765 

218,708 

12,653,72V 
607,631 

702,275 
1,480,445 
1,486,251 
889,653 
3,078,867 
l,284,20t 
1,864,548 
369,9ic 
1,091,99C 
1,035,946 
451,001 
824,944 
537,946 

222,335 
16,395,182 
825,681 
3,348,967 
469,561 
1,708,800 
619,042 
4,888,602 

2,155,685 
2,196,111 

3,770,547 

385,877 

208,795 
423,917 
445,893 
218,708 
807,887 
422,244 
645,691 
129,472 
353,545 
375,493 
330,351 
152,n2r> 
107,589 

133,401 
9,837,109 
495,409 
2,009,380 
281,737 
1,025,280 
3J9,521 
2,933,165 

1,077,845 
1,317,687 

Paints  and  colors  
Paper  and  Manufactures  of  
Pickles,  Capers  and  Sauces,  n.o.  p.  for 
Potatoes.  bush 
Salt  in  bags,  sacks,  &c  Ibs 
Salt  in  bulk  Ibs 
Seeds,  Flaxseed  or  Linseed  bush 
Seeds,  Garden 

2,356^965 
312,911,360 
412,988,686 
762,627 

SILKS  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF  — 
Braids,  Fringes  and  Galloons  
Dress  and  piece  goods  
Hosiery.  
Laces  
Ready-made  Clothing  
Ribbons  
Ribbons,  cotton  edge  
Mauuf  act's  wholly  or  mainlv  of  silk 
Manufactures,  mixed  with  25  per  ct. 
or  over  of  cotton,  wool,  &c  .  .  . 
Velvets  

Total  Silk  and  Manufactures  of 
Soap  Ibs 
SPICES— 
Cassia  and  Cassiavera  Ibs 
Nutmegs  Ibs 
Pepper,  not  ground  Ibs 
Total  Spices  
SPIRITS  AND  WINES— 
Brandy  gall 
Cordials,  &c  gall 
Spirits,  other,  from  grain  gall 
Spirits,  from  other  materials  .  .  .gall 
Champagne,  pint  and  under  doz 
quarts  doz 
Still  Wines,  in  casks  gall 
in  bottles  gall 
Total  Spirits  and  Wines  
SUGAR  AND  MOLASSES— 
Molasses  .  .    .gall 

1,664,647 
661,132 
6,973,645 

588,702 
141,292 
659,824 
271,892 
316,147 
208,841 
6.901,551 
221,600 

-    19,848,814 
8.210.199 

83,307,112 
304,119 

139,95* 
361,842 
718,40C 

15,654,941. 
136,811 

166,465 
132,226 

348,642 

1,682,168 

1,414,338 

222,442 
436,411 
168,888 
2,011,542 
2,558,536 
4,379  951 
1,235,864 

873,886 

1,177,408 
282,588 
1,319,648 
54:1,784 
948,443 
1,243,046 
2,760,620 
354,561 

12,586,869 
5,165,82* 
1,894.019 

8,741,958 
1,240,551 
328,409 

do       not  above  56°  .  ,  .           ...  gall 

i  ».*:.^ 

Dm 

DUTIABLE    ARTICLES.              Quantities. 

Values.        j)utv 

Duties. 

Ad 

1 

Val 

Dollars.;                          Dollars,  ,1ft  c 

Syrup,  Meiada,ttc.,notaboveyO°...lbs 

214,818,140 

9,026,804  2c    per  Jb         4,2%,3t;:i 

47  b 

Syrup,  &Q.,  not  above  96».  Ibs 

14,491,875 

689,306  2.  24C.  pr  Ib        324.  61  b 

47  0 

Sugar,  No.  7,  or  under  Ibs 

797,011.161 

31,910,89::    \l-'.lc.     " 

I  A  25  pr  ct 

17,434,619 

54.  b 

do       No.  7  to  10  Ibs 

850,185,097 

40,389,5if    \2c.  peril. 

U25percl  21,254,627 

52.6 

do        No.  10  to  13  Ibs 

23,548,433 

1,103,181 

j^c.pflb 

(A  25  per  c 

662.300 

GO.  4 

Total  Sugar  and  Molasses  

91,406,718 

46,172,379 

50  5 

Tin,  plates  or  sheets  Ibs 

453,724,126 

16,688,277 

IMOc.prlb 

4,990,965 

29.9 

Total   Tin  and  Manufactures  of 

16,797,322 

5,075,052 

30.2 

TOBACCO  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF  — 

i 

Leaf,  iiuinanufactured  Ibs 

13,811,140!    7,414,104 

35c.  pr  Ib         4,833,899 

65  2 

Cigars,  Cigarettes,  &c  Ibs 

787,393     3,055,124    }$2.50prlb     2,732,264  i  89  4 

|A  25prct 

Total  Tobacco  and  Manufactures 

10.515.8U6;                             7,b6l,638 

72.  fc 

Varnish,  value  $1.50  or  less  gall|          152,860!      '161,973  SOcgl  A20pc        108,82'! 

67.1 

Varnibb,  over  $1.50  ....gall           113,598j       274,239  50c  gl  *25pc        125,359 
Vegetables,  preserved,  not  provided  for  j      346,416|85  per  ct             121,245 

45  7 
35 

WOOD  AND  MANUFACTURES  OF— 

1                                           ! 

Lumber,  unplaned  M  feet 

486,410!    6,649.643  $2  per  M             972,821 

14  6 

Wood,  manufactures,  notprov.  for. 
Total  wood  and  manufactures.  .  . 

865,559  35  per  ct 
"9^530,  364 

302,946 
1,703,096 

35 
17.8 

WOOL  AND  MANUFACTURES— 

Raw  Wools,  Class  1,  under  82c  Ibs 

11,466,637 

2,526,477 

HOc.  prlb 

1,424,576 

56  : 

<  A  11  pr  ct 

Combing,  Class  2,  32c.,  or  under.  .Ibs 

1,306,751 

314,491 

JlOc.  pr  Ib 

165,258    52  f 

/A  11  pr  ct 

Carpet,&c.,  Class  3,12c.'$  Ib  orless,  Ibs 

28,477,593 

3,43S,7«7 

3c.  per  Ib 

S5-I  ,:J2s 

24.81 

do       value  over  12C  per  Ib  Ibs 

11,652,510 

2,143,750 

6c.        " 

699,151 

32  b 

Carpets,  Axminster,  &c  sqr.  yds 
do       Brussels,  Jacquard.  .sqr.  yds 

269,174 
136,505 

474,575 
165,636 

50  per  ct 
44c  y  A35  p  c 

237,288 
118,035 

50 
71  2 

Mats,  Rugs,  &c  

296,898 

45  per  ct 

133,604 

45 

Cloth  ,lbs 

10,806,324 

|&0c.  pr  Ib 

7,892,226 

73.0 

1  A  35  per  c 

Rags,  Shoddy,&c  Ibs 

8,220,025        423,120 

12c  per  Ib 

116,509 

27.5 

Other  manufactures  of  wool,  not 

(afrperlb 

otherwise  provided  for  

971,406 

1,398,389 

1  A  35  per  c 

952,479 

68  1 

.Clothing  and  wearing  apparel  —  Ibs 

712,364 

1,427,457    U40pr.  c        927,165 

64.  P 

Hosiery,  value  over  SOc  per  Ib  —  Ibs 

302,089 

I   IfiOcperll) 
677,418!  |A  35  per  cj       388,141 

57.3 

Shirts,  drawers,  <&c.,  value  above 

Wcperlb 

8Uc  per  Ib  Ibs 

94,502 

224,966 

I  A  :55  per  <• 

125,989 

56 

Shawle,  woolen  •  Ibs 

238,764 

509,421 

\50cper  Ib 

297,67y 

;'i8  .  4 

\  A  35  per  c 

Shawls,  worsted  Ibs 

282,016 

686,267 

SOcper  Ib 

415,515 

60.5 

Dress  goods,  not  over  20c  per  sqr. 

|  A  40  per  c 

yard   yds 

44,581,580 

7,830,094 

i6c  per  yd 

5.415.42S 

69.1 

I  A  35  per  c 

Dress  goods  above  20c  sqr.  yd  yds 

42,532,940 

11,959,029 

J8c  per  yd 

8,186,247 

68.4 

Dress  goods  weighing  4  ozs. 

(  A  40  per  c 

and  over  sqr.  yd  yds 

1,914,088 

2,829,983 

50c  per  Ib 

1,947,538 

68.8 

(  A  35  per  c 

Flannels,  above  SOc  per  Ib  IDS 

132,086 

171,931 

J50cperlb 

126,219 

73.4 

Worsted  and  wool  manufactures, 

(  A  35  per  c 

below  SOc  per  Ib  Ibs 

374,543        272,959 

40cpei  Ib 

245,353 

89.8 

Worsted  and  wool  manufactures, 

(  A  35  per  c-  ! 

above  SOc  per  Ib  Ibs 

438,7761       608,803 

^50cper  Ib        432,469 

71  0 

'l  A  :'.-">  per  c 

Webbings,  beltings,  &c  Ibs 

228,560:       fiP.9,523 

<50cperlb        434,  04  -J 

67  8 

j 

A  50  per  (• 

Yarns,  value  above  SOc  per  Ib.  ;  .  .  .Ibs 

326,468,       366,975    J50c  peril) 

291,676    79.4 

1                     /  A  35  per  c 

Total  Wool  and  Manufactures  of 

51  044  444 

•7T;  -j«>(j  syy    (»*!  '*, 

Zinc  or  Spelter,  in  pigs  Ibs 

17,067,211       '655,501 

IJoC  per  Ib 

'25fi.008 

39  0 

Total  Dutiable  and  Average  Duty 

493,916384 

209  659  69^ 

42.4 

Total  Free  of  Duty  

206,913289 

Total  Imports  Entered  for  Con- 
sumption'and  Average  Duty  

700,829673 

209659699 

29.9 

U.C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


